"You play so bad and get so lucky"

I don't usually post so often, but the last post I did reminded me of a hand I played the previous week where my opponent said to me, "You play so bad and get so lucky." Here's what happened.

Blinds were 50-100. I raised to 300 in middle position with A-10 suited (hearts). A couple of others called & the button player (Matt somebody-or-other) raised to 1200. The lady to my right called the 1200. Normally, I don't call a raise with A-10, but I felt like doing so in this case. This guy was on the button and I had no way of knowing if he was just making a move or not at that point, although I had played with him a couple of other times and he seemed to play fairly tight. One of the other people who called my raise also called the re-raise.

The flop was 10-7-3 or something like that - rainbow. So I had top pair with top kicker. We all checked to the button raiser who bet 2,500. The lady to my right called fairly quickly. At that point, I thought Matt might have an overpair, but I also felt that the lady's call made it OK for me to call also, which I did. The other caller folded and we three were the only ones left.

The turn was an ace, giving me top 2 pair. The lady checked. I decided to bet because I felt like I had a pretty good hand at that point. I threw out 5,000 and that's when Matt said, "You play so bad and get so lucky." He was visibly pissed off. To my credit, I was very cool about it and basically said nothing. He called my bet and the lady folded. (She said after the hand that she folded 8-8 and would have hit a set on the river, so it was a good thing I bet I guess.)

The river was an 8, which did put a straight possibility on the board, but I didn't think Matt had that kind of hand. I honestly thought he had an overpair and I was right. I bet 8,000 on the river and he called. Without waiting for me to show my hand, he tabled K-K. When he saw my A-10, he started talking smack about me again. He continued for about three hands afterward. I did my best to ignore him and several people (and dealers) told me later that they were pleased and surprised by the way I acted (that I hadn't gone ballistic right back at him).

Matt has done this to me before, however. About a month ago I beat him on the river with a flush after I had flopped middle pair and 4 of my suit. He said I was a terrible player that time too. I'm telling you, if this guy gives me grief again, I'm going to flat out tell him to shut his rude ass up. I heard from somebody that he is a dealer somewhere & that really amazed me with the attitude he had. You would think he'd never had his kings busted before.

So, was I wrong to play this hand this way? Was Matt just frustrated or am I really a bad player? Comments appreciated. Be brutally honest please. Thanks.

Help!

I'm amazed at the play of this hand from a tournament last week at Jokers. I was pretty desperate and went all-in with an A-8 offsuit on the button for 1600.

Mike #1 in the small blind raised to 4600. Action folded around to Mike #2 (middle of table) who called.

Flop comes A-J-? with 2 spades. Hope springs eternal for yours truly. Mike #1 bets. I can't remember all the bet sizes, but they weren't cheap. Rut row. (I think he has a bigger kicker than me - maybe even A-J). Mike #2 calls without even thinking about it. The turn is a blank but another spade, making a flush possible. Mike #1 bets again. Mike #2 calls again.

The river is yet another spade. I have no spades. I know I am screwed, but what amazes me is what happens with the 2 Mikes. Mike #1 bets yet again. Mike #2 calls pretty quickly.

Mike #1 turns over 10-10 without any spade. Mike #2 turns over 6-6 with one spade and takes the entire huge pot.

This was mostly sidepot action & didn't concern me at all & I knew I was doomed, but here are my thoughts on this hand for what it's worth.

First, how does Mike #2 call a fairly large re-raise with a rather small pair? How in heck does Mike #1 bet out on the flop holding 10-10 with 2 overcards on the board? How does Mike #2 call the flop bet holding 6-6?

After Mike #2 calls the first bet, why does Mike #1 continue to fire into the side pot? Why does Mike #2 call again?

And, most insanely, how does Mike #1 continue to fire on the river when there are 4 spades and he doesn't have one and there are still those 2 overcards out there? And continuing the insanity, how in hell does Mike #2 think his 6-6 with the tiny spade is good and call the river?

I am flabbergasted. Am I the only one who thinks the two Mikes are crazy? Sometimes I just don't get it. And believe me, most of the time I want both of the Mikes in my pots.

Poker Weekend

Friday I got off work early & played the 3:00 at Jokers to no avail. For some reason I decided to go play live at the Crazy Moose afterward. I keep telling myself not to play live unless I win a tournament first, but I never listen to myself. I'm glad I went because I bought in for $200 and left 5 hours later with $825. Not too shabby for me.

On Saturday I took first in the Jokers 12:30 tournament for a profit of $440, so my profit for the weekend was $965 at that point (deducting tournament buy-ins and tips). I went off to Pendleton for the summer poker round-up beginning at noon on Sunday. I was planning on going anyway, but now it was basically a free roll. Always a good thing.

There were 197 players. I did well until right before the dinner break when I ran into two hands that just turned out wrong. It's so hard to win tournaments anyway . . . whether it's 40 players or 200+. But I lasted longer than 112 other people, so I was OK with that. I'm going to get a bracelet sooner or later, gosh darn it!! Anyway, it was fun to play all weekend for virtually nothing.