Hand Dissection - Jamie “pokerjamers” Armstrong

Not convinced poker is a game of skill? This article might alter your opinion of No Limit Hold’em as we delve into the mind of one of the top tournament poker players in the world.

Jamie “pokerjamers” Armstrong took some time with Poker News Daily to discuss a remarkable hand he played against Full Tilt Pro Scott Montgomery during a $5,000 FTOPS event in January of 2009. Armstrong is a regular in the high-stakes tournament scene, both live and online, and is ranked 39th on the PocketFives.com World Wide Rankings (as of August 5th). He has several massive scores under his belt, including a three-way chop of the first-ever $3,150 buy-in PokerStars SCOOP event in April. He collected $380,000 for his work in that two-day tournament. Armstrong also has a victory in the Full Tilt Poker $1K Monday for $105,000 and took 16th in the inaugural $1,000 Stimulus Event at the 2009 World Series of Poker for $44,801.

His exceptional analysis of this particular hand against Montgomery speaks for itself. Sit back and enjoy:

Hand Setup:
Seat 1: Jamie “pokerjamers” Armstrong (28,354)
Seat 2: ScottMontgomery (22,789)
Seat 3: bballer88 (11,547)
Seat 4: BickleAce (21,201)
Seat 5: cliftong (30,922)
Seat 7: SmackGirl (12,958)
Seat 8: WinnerFish (10,508)
Seat 9: kenny05 (13,590)

Blinds are 100/200

Poker News Daily: You’re perceived as a very loose-aggressive player by a lot of your peers. Is that an accurate assessment for the most part or is your style dependent on who you’re seated at a table with?

Jamie Armstrong: For the most part I play a loose-aggressive style, but it definitely changes depending on who’s to my left and right and their stacks, my stack, etc. At the time the hand was played I don’t think people viewed me as aggressive as they view me now, although I’ve actually tightened up in different situations greatly due to my “crazy” image.

PND: Talk about this table a little bit. Were there any players you were looking to play pots with? Anyone you were avoiding?

Jamie Armstrong: I may be mistaken, but I would consider this table draw very favorable for a $5K (event). I recognize most of the players to some extent, though over a small sample size none strike me as very tricky or difficult to play against. The only person I really wanted to avoid playing pots with was Yevgeniy Timoshenko (bballer88). He’s an amazing player and definitely levels above me and it wouldn’t be very smart to go out of my way to play pots with him out of position. Scott Montgomery also had position on me and I didn’t know much about him besides he’s crazy and is not afraid to put a lot of chips in the pot in very weird spots by playing very tricky post flop. So, I wouldn’t say I was going out of my way to play pots with Scott, but I definitely was ready to get involved with him and take advantage of his spewy nature.

Cards are dealt:

Action folds around to Armstrong on the button and he raises to 550 with

Montgomery calls from the small blind and Timoshenko folds.

PND: With stacks this deep how often are you raising from the button and with what range of cards?

JA: My button was the best place for me to be opening a wide range of hands; not only because it’s my button, but because it was one of two times an orbit I had position on the best player at the table as well as the most spewy. I’m not sure what my exact opening range is here but it’s very wide, even pre-ante. I’m definitely opening any pair, any two broadways, any suited ace, most suited kings, suited connectors, connectors, etc. is pretty close to the bottom of my opening range, though.

PND: What are your thoughts about Scott Montgomery’s game and how wide do you think he’s calling your raise out of the big blind?

JA: I had no prior history with Scott and I am not sure he knows who I am at all. I really don’t know too much about his game, but based primarily on the A4o hand he played in the (2008) WSOP Main Event I can tell he likes to make strange plays and put a lot of chips in the pot with no fold equity and very little pot equity. I assume he’s calling a lot of suited connectors, pairs, broadways, suited aces, kings, etc. He’s probably calling even wider than I’m opening the button just because he loves playing pots.

Flop :

Montgomery checks and Armstrong leads out for 800. Montgomery check-raises to 2,200, and after some consideration, Armstrong calls.

PND: You fire a continuation bet and Scott thinks for a few moments before putting in a check-raise. Explain your thought process here. You’re not calling because you think your 8-high is ahead so why do you decide on a call?

JA: When the flop comes K-K-5 rainbow I immediately decide I’m just going to shut down (at first). The flop is extremely dry so very few hands hit this flop. I know Scott realizes this as well so he expects to take the pot down with a check/raise a high percentage of the time. I was being optimistic and hoped he viewed me as a complete random who wouldn’t play back at him on this flop without a hand. I made a continuation bet clearly hoping to take the pot down there, but also with the plan to flat call a check/raise from Scott. I obviously don’t think my 8-high is good at this point, but felt this would be the best way to represent a King. I could make a 3-bet on the flop, but it really doesn’t seem believable and Scott is going to throw in another raise far too often.

Turn:

Montgomery bets 4,000. Armstrong min-raises to 8,000.

PND: He maintains control by leading out at the turn. You stick with your read and put in a min-raise. Did you initially feel like this would win you the pot?

JA: I know this may seem crazy, but everything stems from the original continuation bet on the flop, which I made with the intention of flatting a check/raise and making a tiny raise if he bet into me on the turn. There are very few turn cards I think he’d check, but most will improve his hand where he’ll now believe he has some showdown value, yet hands that won’t beat any hand I’d call a bet with on the turn so value betting would be out of the question. Scott would bet any hand he did hit on the flop; Kx and 55. He made a bet of 4,000 on a complete blank offsuit two, which made no sense to me. There was like 5,500 in the pot and a bet this size is not going to be called by much, so he’s representing basically only 55 and I still think he’d make a smaller bet with 55 and any King. I decided to min-raise to 8,000 expecting to win the pot a lot of the time even though I would probably never take this line with a King or 55, but I didn’t think Scott would think of that. I felt this was my best option on the turn, as flatting the turn creates way too many crappy river situations since he could easily fire a third barrel on the river and folding the turn would make the flop call terrible.

Montgomery min-raises to 12,000, leaving about 8,000 chips left in his stack.

PND: Does the min re-raise startle you at all?

JA: I didn’t expect the min-reraise, but it really only furthered my read that he was completely full of it and was on complete air.

PND: What is it about his line that you aren’t buying at this point?

JA: Everything he did on the turn; the size of his lead and min-reraising made no sense for an actual hand. I was pretty confident he would fold to a shove, which I only had to be a right a decent percentage of the time to make it profitable since there is so much in the pot already and I really thought he was calling me close to zero percent of the time.

Armstrong moves all in, having Montgomery’s remaining stack covered.

PND: Describe your reasoning behind the shove a bit more. Are you putting him on rags or does your raise look so strong that you feel like you can take him off most of his hands?

JA: The fact that he left a decent amount of chips behind was enough information for me to shove here. I am basically putting him on a complete bluff.

Montgomery goes into the tank and eventually folds. Armstrong shows .

PND: This might be the best bluff I’ve ever seen, made even better by the fact that you show it for the world to see. Is this a once-in-a-lifetime type thing or do you have these kinds of plays in your regular arsenal?

JA: I was thrilled that he didn’t call my shove instantly because his range was so extremely polarized that it’s either a snap-call or a snap-fold, so he was just saving face here by timebanking. In the meantime I rushed to the options tab on Full Tilt to turn off the auto-muck option and was happy to show a pretty absurd bluff. This is definitely a once in a life type of bluff. While I do still make spazzy bluffs that work sometimes, nothing compares to this.

Related Poker News:

Huge 100% Match Bonus up to $500 Free! Plus $75 Free Refer-A-Friend!

Full screen 3D animated & 2D ("bird's eye") view options, Extra games

Poker lexicon:

ANTE - A small bet all players are required to make before a hand is dealt. Not all games have an ante. Related terms: BLIND, FORCED BET.
POCKET ROCKETS - In Hold'em, a pair of aces for hole cards.
GOOD GAME - A game with players worse than you so that you can expect to win a lot of money.
SEVENTH STREET - The seventh card dealt in 7-card stud.
BUTTON CHARGE - A periodic fee paid by whoever is the button, perhaps every 20 minutes or 30 minutes. Constitutes part or all of the HOUSE CUT.
NO-LIMIT POKER - A game where there is no maximum bet; a player can wager any amount (perhaps above some minimum) up to whatever money is on the table in front of him.

♥ Bookmark Us! ♠

Poker Information