KQ suited (from the Big Blind) - post flop analysis

[Scuba Chuck]

Thoughts on all streets appreciated.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t15 (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

UTG+2 (t930)
MP1 (t992)
MP2 (t993)
MP3 (t970)
CO (t630)
Button (t975)
SB (t985)
Hero (t1000)
UTG (t1525)
UTG+1 (t1000)

Preflop: Hero is BB with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif, K/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls t15, UTG+2 calls t15, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, CO calls t15, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB completes, Hero checks.

<font color="blue"> Had thought about the Van Sexton, but what for? </font>

Flop: (t75) K/images/graemlins/club.gif, 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks,
<font color="blue"> My thoughts here were to check raise </font>

<font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets t75</font>, UTG+2 calls t75, CO folds, SB folds, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to t300</font>, UTG+1 calls t225, UTG+2 calls t225.

<font color="blue"> Well, I definately don't like two callers. My inclination is to be through with this hand. I'm out of position, and there's now a lot of money in this pot. </font>

Turn: (t975) 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks, UTG+2 checks.

<font color="blue"> Whoa, everybody checks. Well, this was a surprise to me. I had at least expected a minibet from a set. There was no flush draw on the flop. I assume we now have another King and perhaps an A3/5? I have TP2k, which I assume is best right now. Any general thoughts on a turn check? Well, I'm thinking a check-call on the river for value. </font>

River: (t975) 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets t685 (All-In)</font>, UTG+2 folds, Hero calls t685 (All-In).

<font color="blue"> The All-in surprised me. I felt confident that villain here had a king. But had no prior reads, so any reader here knows as much about villain as I do. </font>

Final Pot: t2345

Results:
<font color="white"> villain had K9 </font>

[Phil Van Sexton]

The preflop check is standard.

The checkraise on the flop is bad, imo. The stacks just aren't deep enough to make plays like this.

Typically, I would only checkraise under the following circumstances...
- I flop a big hand, but there are some obvious draws that I want to get rid of and the pot is big. I would typically check-raise allin.

- I flop a monster draw and the pot is big. I would check-raise allin.

- There is an aggressive player behind me who is likely to make a continuation bet, and I think the flop missed him. For example, he raised preflop likely with a pp. An ace flops, I might checkraise with any hand hoping he has KK-TT. If called, I'm done.

In all 3 cases, I'm done with the hand after the checkraise, so I rarely have to play out of position in a giant pot of my own creation.

The problem is that now you have to either go allin on the turn/river, or you have to check. If you check and they push, you don't know if they have a monster, have nothing and sense weakness, or have 2nd best hand which they think is good now. With no read, you often have to call.

In your hand, you certainly could justify folding the river. UTG+1 is pushing into 2 opponents, so it's less likely that he's on a pure bluff. Even with a hand like KJ, he'd probably be content to check it down.

Since I've seen the results, I'm not sure what my unbiased decision on the river would've been.

On the flop, I'd probably lead out and bet the pot. The board is drawless, but there's just too many people in the hand for my liking. Check/calling is fine if you think someone behind you will bet for you. It's unlikely you'll go broke with either of these lines.

btw - The blue and white text may have biased my answer somewhat. Be careful with this as many people are easily influenced.

[johnnybeef]

preflop is fine

if live, this would be a great spot to check blind, but we arent, so i check here and let someone else drive the bus. as it were, your hand is likely good as somone will likely raise preflop with ak. however, you have a hand in which there was a healthy bet and a caller, and your edge is not huge, so id fold the flop. there is no reason to get involved right now (especially since you are out of positionj), get out while you can for cheap.


since you checkraised the flop, you need to bet the turn.

river is an easy fold.

[Unarmed]

I check/call the flop.
If UTG+2 has a set, thats a shame, but I'd hate to blow out a weaker king by C/R the flop.

Turn is fine.
Ugh... bet/call flop, check turn, push river on a dry board?
I call, but I don't like it.
If the river is a J and he shoves I turbo-muck.

[The Yugoslavian]

Pre-flop:
Ha! Yeah, this is no time for a Van Sexton....although we all know how you like to use the latest and hippest STT slang, /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

Flop:
I'm not sure I'd want to let the pot get so big so quickly by going for a check/raise on the flop. I like calling for value instead and perhaps check/raising the turn or check/calling for value again.

Turn:
I think the way this went down discounts trips. However, someone could now be slowplaying their set -&gt; full house.

River:
The pot is too big to fold on the river....*but*, there is a decent chance that villian hit two pair on the river or had a set all along. How quickly did he go allin on the river?

Yugoslav

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
How quickly did he go allin on the river?


[/ QUOTE ]

He couldn't hit the button fast enough. I don't put much emphasis on internet tells, btw. Do you?

[adanthar]

If you're going to CR this, push the turn. If you don't push the turn, value bet the river and call a push.

You probably lost this to K9 or something but oh well.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
You probably lost this to K9 or something but oh well.


[/ QUOTE ]

"but oh well", is that the right attitude to take losing this hand? Meaning, that the way this hand played out, I played it ok, but you win some, you lose some?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

He couldn't hit the button fast enough. I don't put much emphasis on internet tells, btw. Do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Long pauses could mean any number of things, but I think near instantaneous pushing here is probably going to indicate strength substantially more often than it indicates a bluff.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're going to CR this, push the turn. If you don't push the turn, value bet the river and call a push.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is really read dependent. Against lots of low-level opponents, I think this is correct. However, I think there's potentially a lot to be concerned about when the rather substantial check-raise gets two callers on a basically drawless board.

I prefer either getting it in on the turn, or, if based on your reads you think a set is quite likely here, shutting down totally and not calling the river push.

[11t]

I push the turn, but if I didn't I would probably call the river.

Sucks if he had AA.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
if based on your reads you think a set is quite likely here,

[/ QUOTE ]

What "read" is there for uncovering a set? if it's 3 way, a call is usually my read. But a subsequent mini-bet (minimum) on the turn gives me the added information. If I had better position on the turn, I would have been more inclined to push, but that wasn't the case.

Based on the flop and turn action, I came to the conlcusion that villain had a King. Since I had TP2K, against a likely non-AK had, I figured villain for KJ.

Regardless, I felt like I played this hand "ok" out of position. I truly felt like the river bet was going to be smaller, and I read the push as a bet that didn't want to be called (in retrospect, wrong). But that bet could also have been Any King.

Ah, just a pain in the ass hand. Sometimes it feels like it's best to just fold this hand out of position.

It would have been nice to see how this hand would have unfolded had I lead out on the flop rather than check-raise.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
What "read" is there for uncovering a set? if it's 3 way, a call is usually my read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me put it this way: what hands are you going to have that you're going to overcall the checkraise with on this board that you also didn't raise preflop? Now what hands might Fishy McLoose do this with?

[pipes]

Just my philosophy, but I play tight weak with a good to marginal hand on level 1. Sometimes I bet the pot on the flop and see what happens and sometimes I don't. But if I do bet the pot and get called I shut down and try to get to showdown cheaply. If not, no big loss. But what I am not going to do is lose my stack or a significant amount of chips on this hand.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
I push the turn, but if I didn't I would probably call the river.

Sucks if he had AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

you'd push the turn after TWO (not one) calls to your massive flop CR?!

You might've won this hand with that bet (and maybe not even) but youll be way down with that move overall if you do that consistently here...

ps...scuba, i think you played this hand fine except maybe the CR was too big?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
What "read" is there for uncovering a set? if it's 3 way, a call is usually my read.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Let me put it this way: what hands are you going to have that you're going to overcall the checkraise with on this board that you also didn't raise preflop? Now what hands might Fishy McLoose do this with?

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, we're speaking the same language. I agree with what you're saying. That's what made the turn action (or lack thereof) so challenging. My read is that a "good" opponent would make some pot-building type bet, minimally, on the turn. The lack of that action lead me to believe my opponents were fishier than I gave them credit for. Do you agree?

[tsevier]

Always great posts scuba, thanks.

This early on I would avoid the big check raise with TP2K. I would probably check and call the bet on the flop and check the turn and river as you did.

Unlucky river card obviously, but I think making the pot so big on the flop is what dooms you on this hand. The pot is big enough that you have to at least consider calling the push on the river.

If you had called the flop and the turn was checked you could get away from an all in bet here or the villain may be inclined to make a smaller value bet that at least won't put you all in.

However, the flip side is that if you just call the flop and check the turn villain may fire another shot on the turn. However, I think I would prefer this to the situation on the river.

Just my opinion.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
This early on I would avoid the big check raise with TP2K.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems like the correct analysis. Although, I'm still dumbfounded as to the calls. I would assume I would have been given more creidibility for a check-raise had I came from any other position than the blinds, perhaps. But yes, keeping the pot small here was probably better. Any thoughts on a CR allin?

tsevier, good thoughts.

[Apathy]

This hand looks ok, unless someone has 222 or 444 you are certaintly ahead on the flop (I suppose KKK is a possibility from UTG+1, but you have a K so unlikely).

I would be more likely to bet out here as it is pretty unlikely anyone has anything, but you played the flop fine.

Good turn check.

Om the river I would fold to a bet by UTG+1, but consider calling a bet by UTG+2, since he may bluff when both checked to him. The thing is, with no draws on board at all, nobody was calling the huge checkraise on the flop without some kind of made hand already that they felt could be the best hand. That means unless the have you beat, they are going to want to show the hand down, not push the river, pretty unlikely anyone was bluffing.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

OK, we're speaking the same language. I agree with what you're saying. That's what made the turn action (or lack thereof) so challenging. My read is that a "good" opponent would make some pot-building type bet, minimally, on the turn. The lack of that action lead me to believe my opponents were fishier than I gave them credit for. Do you agree?

[/ QUOTE ]

I will sometimes bet the turn with a set, I will sometimes check behind and hope that a K will value bet the river, particularly against aggressive opponents. When the turn fills me up, I'm not that scared about giving a free card.

I agree that the turn decision is very tough there, and as I commented before, what I do from here depends on my opinions of the various players. Against some players I'll bet out again, against some I'm done with this hand.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

This early on I would avoid the big check raise with TP2K. I would probably check and call the bet on the flop and check the turn and river as you did.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get the appeal of being this passive. Against highly aggressive opponents who fire multiple barrels this is probably good, but if you're not in this situation, you have a hand that is highly likely to be best given the preflop action and you need to bet it if they won't.

[Scuba Chuck]

Out of curiosity, I think this is the best concensus here for how to play this hand:

Flop:
Bet pot (t75) - likely to have gotten the two callers. Might have seen a reraise by UTG+1. If that occurred, I'd likely fold as I would have feared a slowplayed AA, and I only have t75 committed to this pot.

Turn:
If I had two callers on the flop, I'd probably check-fold, or check-call. What's interesting here is the board paired here. It doesn't seem likely that the two tripled anybody up, but it could have filled up a boat for someone. It seems very likely a check-fold is the best plan of action here.

River:
If checked around on the turn, then a check-value call if the bet is reasonable/small enough.

How does that look?

Scuba

[tsevier]

[ QUOTE ]
Any thoughts on a CR allin?

[/ QUOTE ]

Check raise all in on the flop? Not for this scared little guy. This early on I really want to avoid getting all my money in with one pair. I think you play higher buy in levels than I so you may be facing more solid competition. But down in the $11s I could be looking at K-2, K-4 or even 2-4 (especially if suited /images/graemlins/smile.gif) and sets of course

My non analytical gut feeling analysis of my play is that I lose to much money in the early rounds playing single pairs. Based on the advice I have been reviewing on this forum and my limited experience I want a bigger hand (2 pair and up) early on or I will be waiting for the later stages.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
Turn:
If I had two callers on the flop, I'd probably check-fold, or check-call. What's interesting here is the board paired here. It doesn't seem likely that the two tripled anybody up, but it could have filled up a boat for someone. It seems very likely a check-fold is the best plan of action here.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems very likely a check-fold is the best plan of action here.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was rambling, but I got the impression that check-fold on the turn with two callers was where this post was heading...

Did I misunderstand?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

I was rambling, but I got the impression that check-fold on the turn with two callers was where this post was heading...

Did I misunderstand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think checking and folding to a large turn bet is probably okay against tight, straightforward opposition. Checking and folding a turn bet to LAGgy players will be a mistake, probably. I think that this is not a situation that can be considered independently of who your two opponents are.

[tsevier]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:

This early on I would avoid the big check raise with TP2K. I would probably check and call the bet on the flop and check the turn and river as you did.

[/ QUOTE ]



I don't get the appeal of being this passive. Against highly aggressive opponents who fire multiple barrels this is probably good, but if you're not in this situation, you have a hand that is highly likely to be best given the preflop action and you need to bet it if they won't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I somewhat explained this in an interim post, but I play the $11s and I could be facing a lot of strange 2 pair hands here and I generally try to stay away from putting a whole bunch of chips in early on with one pair.

On second thought I am in agreement that checking the flop is probably too passive. I would prefer to make a pot sized bet on the flop and see what my opponents do. If they raise significantly I am probably out. If they call I would be trying to check it down.

I am very new and really just verbalizing my thought process that may be entirely wrong, but I think this is an interesting hand and hope I'm not too far off base.

My driving principle on this is that I would be very reluctant to put 300 chips in the pot on this flop under many circumstances (unless playing a known maniac). But I may well be too passive.

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet pot (t75) - likely to have gotten the two callers. Might have seen a reraise by UTG+1. If that occurred, I'd likely fold as I would have feared a slowplayed AA, and I only have t75 committed to this pot.


[/ QUOTE ]

That is exactly why I hate leading this flop against opponents who drastically overvalue their holdings. For all Mr. K9 knows, you're a fish taking a stab at the pot from the blinds with mid pair. He has all powerful top pair ish kicker so he raises and you fold the best hand.

Boo.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly why I hate leading this flop against opponents who drastically overvalue their holdings. For all Mr. K9 knows, you're a fish taking a stab at the pot from the blinds with mid pair. He has all powerful top pair ish kicker so he raises and you fold the best hand.

Boo.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting, that's precisely the reason I thought I would take the check-raise approach to begin with. As I consider this hand more, I seriously don't mind the check-raise, except that it builds the pot ('cos I didn't realize how fishy the $55s really are). And just shutdown after the flop bet.

It makes you/me wonder how Mr K9 would have bet had he not hit the 9 on the river. Damn cards.

[The Yugoslavian]

The way you play this flop necessarily dictates how you will play the rest of the hand. So, what is your plan?

(hint: 'my thought was to check raise' isn't a plan)

If you want the pot right there on the flop, then I guess your check/raise is a decent idea. If you want to extract maximum value....I don't like it.

Also, the pot got way out of control (not in the right way) for your hand and you were faced with a very difficult river decision.

If your plan is to check/call the flop then you can either check/raise the turn or keep check/calling (or fold, depending...).

If your plan is to lead out the flop, then you probably should keep leading out. Once you exercise your betting impetus, you sorta gotta go with it otherwise the other players will capitalize on it (although doing these sorts of weirdo things vs. good players is actually a nice idea, /images/graemlins/grin.gif ).

You need a plan for how you're going to play this hand. You didn't seem to have one. The way you played it I would feel compelled to check/fold the turn but check/call the river.

As for the insta-push, it probably makes me go into a think tank reviewing the hand. I doubt I get away from the almost 1700 chips with about 700 or so behind, though.

Yugoslav

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
My driving principle on this is that I would be very reluctant to put 300 chips in the pot on this flop under many circumstances (unless playing a known maniac). But I may well be too passive.


[/ QUOTE ]

While I like your thoughts in general, the only difference I had with your opinion (at least while playing the hand) is that I have likely the best hand on the flop, barring a set. Watching the way this hand played out, I concluded (incorrect or not) that my opponents didn't have a set, which put me back at best hand, I thought.

Obviously playing passive, or just check-folding the flop avoids this situation, but that seems entirely too passive with TP2K.

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly why I hate leading this flop against opponents who drastically overvalue their holdings. For all Mr. K9 knows, you're a fish taking a stab at the pot from the blinds with mid pair. He has all powerful top pair ish kicker so he raises and you fold the best hand.

Boo.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting, that's precisely the reason I thought I would take the check-raise approach to begin with. As I consider this hand more, I seriously don't mind the check-raise, except that it builds the pot ('cos I didn't realize how fishy the $55s really are). And just shutdown after the flop bet.

It makes you/me wonder how Mr K9 would have bet had he not hit the 9 on the river. Damn cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

So once UTG+1 bets his lovely king, why do you want to blow him off the hand by raising?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
So once UTG+1 bets his lovely king, why do you want to blow him off the hand by raising?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno, good question. Two thoughts. One - to protect my hand, or inform him mine is better... Two - to get him to put more chips in the pot (which was not my intent here).

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So once UTG+1 bets his lovely king, why do you want to blow him off the hand by raising?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno, good question. Two thoughts. One - to protect my hand, or inform him mine is better... Two - to get him to put more chips in the pot (which was not my intent here).

[/ QUOTE ]

One - What turn card scares you? I.E. what are you protecting against?
Two - You already know thats a bad move with a vulnerable hand OOP /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
The way you played it I would feel compelled to check/fold the turn but check/call the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I played the hand, and according to my OP, you can read from my blue comments that this was precisely my plan. So why the "plan" criticism?

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It seems very likely a check-fold is the best plan of action here.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was rambling, but I got the impression that check-fold on the turn with two callers was where this post was heading...

Did I misunderstand?

[/ QUOTE ]


I didn't have time to respond at the time and was hoping you would come to your senses so I wouldn't even need to respond.

Do you really think the 2 helped someone? I doubt it. I don't really care if it improves someone to a full house because I was losing to their hand anyway.

When the flop is Kx2 and you are called in 2 places, what holding is more likely? Kx or x2?

I think its Kx. If you check the turn, K9 is going to bet, and you fold????

You could check/call, or bet 150 and fold to a raise.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
One - What turn card scares you? I.E. what are you protecting against?


[/ QUOTE ]

This seems sort of obvious. There are two cards that scare me.

1) An Ace
2) Any card that pairs his kicker.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
When the flop is Kx2 and you are called in 2 places, what holding is more likely? Kx or x2?


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I'm hypersensitive, but I guess I thought that a set may have been completed. I was not concered at all of an x2. If someone had x2 here, they deserve to win, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
You could check/call, but I'd probably just bet 150 and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

When do you define that you're up against a set, and let a hand go? Is it with this move?

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One - What turn card scares you? I.E. what are you protecting against?


[/ QUOTE ]

This seems sort of obvious. There are two cards that scare me.

1) An Ace
2) Any card that pairs his kicker.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Who has the ace?
2) I'm generally not too concerned about 3 outers.
3) I like numbered lists /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Good thread BTW. We need more post flop discussion.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

You could check/call, but I'd probably just bet 150 and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against an opponent who has c/r'd the flop and bets out again on the turn, I'm calling with my set of 4's here. What do you do on the river? Lead again? Check/fold? Check/call? Also, this is a very small bet relative to the pot; it looks like a bet that you're going to fold to a raise, and consequently a weaker K might take this away from you. If I think I'm value betting the best hand, why don't I bet a couple hundred more, which will still get called, probably? I don't see what this accomplishes.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
When do you define that you're up against a set, and let a hand go? Is it with this move?

[/ QUOTE ]

When they do something that someone with Kx wouldn't do, you have to be concerned. If you check the turn and they bet, you've learned nothing, so you can't fold. If you bet and they raise, you may need to be concerned.

The problem with creating a huge pot with your checkraise is that it makes harder to decide if subsequent bets are coming from KJ or K9.

Of course, if I were one of the callers with something like KJ, I'd probably raise you on the turn to buy a free river. So maybe check/calling is best if your opponent is aggressive.

[Unarmed]

Bah.
C/Ring the flop screwed this hand all up. (no offense Scuba)

Check/Call flop.
Lead turn for 150.
Lead river for 150.
Fold to any raise.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Bah.
C/Ring the flop screwed this hand all up. (no offense Scuba)

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense taken. I'm obviously lost here, and want to learn. On a personal note, I feel like my postflop play is getting better (I hope). And it's from posting my HH's and revealing my mistakes and quack thought processes that's helping.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

C/Ring the flop screwed this hand all up. (no offense Scuba)


[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen a number of posts talking about how the checkraise is awful and screwed this all up. This seems a little results oriented to me. Do you really expect two callers to that checkraise? That's the only thing, to my mind, that makes the rest of this hand hard, and I would expect that to be highly unlikely unless I were beat or my opponents were terrible. But if your opponents were bad and you expected them to both call you with crap, then it's still easy, because you just push it on the turn and watch the KT's call you.

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really expect two callers to that checkraise?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I expect zero callers. That is precisely why the C/R is so bad.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
C/Ring the flop screwed this hand all up. (no offense Scuba)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I've seen a number of posts talking about how the checkraise is awful and screwed this all up. This seems a little results oriented to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

My following comments are purely for discussion:

The credibility I have given to the c/r faux pau is that there are benefits (at least I've read from books) to keeping pots small. If this assumption is incorrect, then I have been blindly following advice without understanding the concept completely.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you really expect two callers to that checkraise?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I expect zero callers. That is precisely why the C/R is so bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you think they'll call both turn and river bets, given that you like leading both turn and river after check/calling the flop?

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The way you played it I would feel compelled to check/fold the turn but check/call the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I played the hand, and according to my OP, you can read from my blue comments that this was precisely my plan. So why the "plan" criticism?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hunh? You did not express any coherent *plan* through your writing. Including your thinking was great though, btw. What you wrote in blue is a brief summary of what you did and some of your thoughts. You never describe any coherent 'plan' along with the reasoning for choosing it. By the time you get to your difficult river decision you have an opinion on what you do and can ask the forum for their thoughts (either on improving your line, or thinking) since you faced a difficult decision and it perhaps compelled you to make a mistake.

An example of a possible plan for this hand could have been:

I wanted to check/raise the flop here because I know UTG+1 will bet out at this flop when he has nothing. This way I can pop him back trapping some extra chips and/or know when he has me beat because he will call or reraise. Since he misses this flop an awful lot, check/raising here should be profitable since he won't call my bets with nothing.

Since I have a good hand, I don't mind UTG+2 coming along for the ride as he's a calling station. In fact, I should be careful with my check/raise amount to not scare his dominated hands away.

Thus, I checked....and after UTG+1's rase to 70 I decided that a raise to 150 chips was about the right amount to get UTG+1 to define his hand for me while allowing the oblivious UTG+2 to still call with mid pair hands and/or dominated kings. Since I've now clearly taken the intiative, I plan to value bet the turn vs. UTG+2 or check/fold if UTG+1 is still in the hand. Pretty much the same thing goes for the river.

UTG+1 folded and UTG+2 called. Turn pairs the board. UTG+2 calls my bet of 1/2 the pot. River brings a harmless 9. I bet 1/2 the pot and now UTG+2 comes over the top allin!?! Hmmm...I think I'm gonna fold but not be happy about it since this means he hit one of his few outs...

Would other 2+2ers take a different line, or call this river action and why??

Yugoslav
PS No more posting results!!!! It's making baby jesus cry!

[john_]

I like pushing on the turn a lot better than calling on the river assuming they were both LAGs. TP2K isn't exactly the hand I like to have all my chips in on this early but think about it with a better hand they probably would have re-raised on the flop. So I think if you're going to CR like that you have to all in majority of the time on the turn. We know UTG+1 is a LAG type player I wonder what UTG+2 had.

It's not really about the result. If I all-in here on the turn and get called by K9 then he hits his 9 on the river I'm content.

[john_]

I like the CR but follow it up on the turn. Make them call with their weak kings...

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
I like pushing on the turn a lot better than calling on the river assuming they were both LAGs. TP2K isn't exactly the hand I like to have all my chips in on this early but think about it with a better hand they probably would have re-raised on the flop. So I think if you're going to CR like that you have to all in majority of the time on the turn. We know UTG+1 is a LAG type player I wonder what UTG+2 had.

It's not really about the result. If I all-in here on the turn and get called by K9 then he hits his 9 on the river I'm content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its exactly not the result at all...of course you push the turn here knowing its a K9...my only points are:

1. CR on flop was WAY too much.

2. 2 calls of that CR scream of a set (I agree scuba).

IF I got into this mess, I would see how committed I was and whether I could still survive, but I dont think, in my experience, one should believe they are ahead here by any means on the turn.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the CR but follow it up on the turn. Make them call with their weak kings...

[/ QUOTE ]

It really surprises me to see the number of people who think that the overcalling of the checkraise indicates two players with Ks. What K's are people limping with? Both of them having K's means all 4 K's are out, and unless you assume they're both going to limp with any K, this means that there aren't going to be that many more ways for them to both have K's than for one to have a K and the other to have 44 or 22, even after the 2 comes on the turn.

Ordinarily I see people giving opponents too much credit for playing well, but in this situation I think people are giving them too little by default.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

C/Ring the flop screwed this hand all up. (no offense Scuba)


[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen a number of posts talking about how the checkraise is awful and screwed this all up. This seems a little results oriented to me. Do you really expect two callers to that checkraise? That's the only thing, to my mind, that makes the rest of this hand hard, and I would expect that to be highly unlikely unless I were beat or my opponents were terrible. But if your opponents were bad and you expected them to both call you with crap, then it's still easy, because you just push it on the turn and watch the KT's call you.

[/ QUOTE ]

it wasnt THAT he checkraised...it was the amount. Pot starts at 75 you dont need to CR to 300 to protect your TP2K. The problem with these feeble party stacks is that by CR THIS much here, there is not much more room to wiggle w/o complete pot commital...

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you really expect two callers to that checkraise?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I expect zero callers. That is precisely why the C/R is so bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you think they'll call both turn and river bets, given that you like leading both turn and river after check/calling the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do, however bet size is important here.
You want to chose an amount that allows you to:

-Keep UTG+1's weaker king in the hand
-Show enough strength (in combination with the power of a call flop/lead turn into a brick line) that you can comfortably lay down to a raise by UTG+2. (whose hand you currently know nothing about)

Half pot (150) is perfect IMO.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like the CR but follow it up on the turn. Make them call with their weak kings...

[/ QUOTE ]

It really surprises me to see the number of people who think that the overcalling of the checkraise indicates two players with Ks. What K's are people limping with? Both of them having K's means all 4 K's are out, and unless you assume they're both going to limp with any K, this means that there aren't going to be that many more ways for them to both have K's than for one to have a K and the other to have 44 or 22, even after the 2 comes on the turn.

Ordinarily I see people giving opponents too much credit for playing well, but in this situation I think people are giving them too little by default.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm the more I think about this hand, the more I wish I hadnt seen the results...I am starting to think a set from the first caller of the CR would just call, and maybe the second caller would push-reraise. I think I'm giving opponents too much credit I guess. (need to do more of that in MY games)

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

it wasnt THAT he checkraised...it was the amount. Pot starts at 75 you dont need to CR to 300 to protect your TP2K. The problem with these feeble party stacks is that by CR THIS much here, there is not much more room to wiggle w/o complete pot commital...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I agree. A smaller c/r will still lead to a fairly substantial pot, if for no other reason than because it's more likely to get called in both places.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
hmmm the more I think about this hand, the more I wish I hadnt seen the results...I am starting to think a set from the first caller of the CR would just call, and maybe the second caller would push-reraise. I think I'm giving opponents too much credit I guess. (need to do more of that in MY games)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad someone finally voiced this. The only reason we think we "know" that UTG+1 has a King is because I checked in the first place. Had I lead out, I would not know if either of the callers had a king, set or other (perhaps mid-pocket pair??).

With regards to the size of the check-raise, I felt that a bet of the pot-size (t225 - after betting) was a good bet, but that just the extra t75 would have been enough to close them out. Meaning that I'd only be called by a set. Little did I know...

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

I do, however bet size is important here.
You want to chose an amount that allows you to:

-Keep UTG+1's weaker king in the hand

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think UTG+1 can pot this flop with 77 or 88? I think there are probably a variety of hands that can make an initial raise here that will fold to any further action later in the hand, given the weakness shown preflop. I think it would be a different story if there were multiple broadway out or it were an A instead of a K, but again, how many K's are people limping with?

[ QUOTE ]

-Show enough strength (in combination with the power of a call flop/lead turn into a brick line) that you can comfortably lay down to a raise by UTG+2. (whose hand you currently know nothing about)

[/ QUOTE ]

It's for this reason that I actually like the c/r on the flop. If UTG+2 doesn't call here, I'm much more inclined to check call and see if I can induce more bets out of UTG+1, but with this call, I'd sort of like to figure out which one of them has a king they want to hold on to. With an overcall, I'm starting to worry a lot more about being beat here.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
"but oh well", is that the right attitude to take losing this hand? Meaning, that the way this hand played out, I played it ok, but you win some, you lose some?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much. Well, that, and K9 calls a push on the turn anyway so it just hurts more when you're rivered. Given that you're getting good odds and both fish checked the turn, meaning you were almost certainly ahead then, the river call is not the interesting part of this hand. Note that UTG+2 probably bets his full house if checked to on the turn.

So like I said, the river call doesn't really matter (you beat KJ or KT 1 in 3 times, IMO). I don't mind the flop CR, not because check/calling is bad but because you will have to bet almost any turn if you check/call the flop (Why? Because a lot of people will bet 77 on the flop but not the turn, and 2 free cards to 2 people is probably one too many even on this board.) Also, there's almost certainly a king around now, and low limit players don't fold kings on a K42 board (many won't even fold A4) so you may as well shovel the chips in *before* the ace hits and kills your action.

In any event, the CR is at least OK/close and I'm not gonna argue with it. Having CR'd, the question then becomes how often you have two people beat on a 2 turn that will call a bet, and this is very buyin/level dependent.

I think it's actually a much larger number than you'd normally guess. Three opponents makes this a check/fold. Two, with almost half your stack in, means you probably bet (on second thought, maybe a value bet of half your stack instead of a push. Why not, they don't know enough to be scared, do they?)

I'll probably post more on this hand later. But you can't check/fold the turn yet in any event.

[john_]

[ QUOTE ]
1. CR on flop was WAY too much.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree completely, but given the fact that they are both LAGs and you did CR the flop with that type of bet I think all in on the turn is almost mandatory.

[ QUOTE ]
2. 2 calls of that CR scream of a set (I agree scuba).

[/ QUOTE ]
If they were decent players I would agree, the fact that the one shown down hand was K9 doesn't really substantiate taht claim to me.

[ QUOTE ]
IF I got into this mess, I would see how committed I was and whether I could still survive, but I dont think, in my experience, one should believe they are ahead here by any means on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
I probably flat call the flop and fold to any substantial raise or bet on any later streets. I'm weak / tight but once there's 975 chips in there, I'm up against two LAGs/calling stations &amp; I probably have the best hand...I am going to find this hard to lay down so I'd rather be the first one to put all my chips in.

[Unarmed]

Sigh...

Given the drawless board, a C/R folds every hand that you beat, destroying every shred of value you have by holding top pair best kicker.

Put another way, you can do the same thing with 27o.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Given the drawless board, a C/R folds every hand that you beat, destroying every shred of value you have by holding top pair best kicker.


[/ QUOTE ]

And I think if this is true, check/calling and leading out on the turn for just slightly less than the amount of your c/r will fold every hand that you beat too. What do you see as being the difference? I don't think the c/r is feared nearly as much (at least at low levels) as I used to think it was. Perhaps by the time you get to the $50s things are different.

[Scuba Chuck]

Adanthar, I CALLED a push by UTG+1 after UTG+2 folded. I was worried most by UTG+2, as I assumed - considering the action - that he was the one with "the hand."

It seems that it is agreed that UTG+1 has a K. That most of the time, that is likely his hand. I am assuming we can agree that he doesn't have an AK since he didn't raise preflop (although he could have AA/KK). So the only hands I'd be concerned with are K2/K4/K9. Thus my reasoning for a call. I "felt" (wrong or right) that villain was overplaying the pot with his top pair. (Dangerous, IMO, as he still don't know how much of a fish UTG+2 is)

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

it wasnt THAT he checkraised...it was the amount. Pot starts at 75 you dont need to CR to 300 to protect your TP2K. The problem with these feeble party stacks is that by CR THIS much here, there is not much more room to wiggle w/o complete pot commital...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I agree. A smaller c/r will still lead to a fairly substantial pot, if for no other reason than because it's more likely to get called in both places.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just proved my point...you lead to same results here but can get away from the hand if you want to be done with it and still have chips to play with...Ill say it again, where I play 2 calls of a cr on the flop screams set...no ifs ands or buts.

[adanthar]

Yeah, that's what I said and posted about...what's ambiguous there? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
You just proved my point...you lead to same results here but can get away from the hand if you want to be done with it and still have chips to play with...Ill say it again, where I play 2 calls of a cr on the flop screams set...no ifs ands or buts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where I play, a coldcall of a bet and raise often means 'set'. A call and then another call means 'weak K' or '53' or 'well I have 5 outs so I call'.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
...Ill say it again, where I play 2 calls of a cr on the flop screams set...no ifs ands or buts.


[/ QUOTE ]

That was what I had surmised. What about the turn checks? Where does that leave you?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

You just proved my point...you lead to same results here but can get away from the hand if you want to be done with it and still have chips to play with...Ill say it again, where I play 2 calls of a cr on the flop screams set...no ifs ands or buts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, but as you point out in your post here, this is a results oriented attitude to the problem. I don't think it's the case that if two players will call your min c/r, they will also necessarily call a c/r to 300. A very likely alternative is that he wins the pot on the flop or isolates.

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Given the drawless board, a C/R folds every hand that you beat, destroying every shred of value you have by holding top pair best kicker.


[/ QUOTE ]

And I think if this is true, check/calling and leading out on the turn for just slightly less than the amount of your c/r will fold every hand that you beat too. What do you see as being the difference? I don't think the c/r is feared nearly as much (at least at low levels) as I used to think it was. Perhaps by the time you get to the $50s things are different.

[/ QUOTE ]


What C/R? I didn't C/R?

Flop (75) Villain bets his king and gets two callers, including me.

Turn (300) I bet 150

Say you're villain, are you folding KQs (I assume you're not playing K9 /images/graemlins/grin.gif) here to my 1/2 pot bet?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

What C/R? I didn't C/R?


[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to be a douche, but what the hell are you talking about? You were talking about how the problem with Scuba's c/r was that it folds hands you beat. Instead, you prefer a check/calling line and leading the turn. I pointed out that I don't see how this line is superior at keeping hands that you beat in. You now rebut with . . .

[ QUOTE ]

Say you're villain, are you folding KQs (I assume you're not playing K9 /images/graemlins/grin.gif) here to my 1/2 pot bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, you mean a hand just as good as what Hero is holding? Of course I'm not folding this, but this is not at all relevant to what we were discussing. What I'd do with K9, or 77, or even 35, is the pertinent question. The whole issue is precisely what hands worse than KQ would do, since that's what we were talking about.

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What C/R? I didn't C/R?


[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to be a douche, but what the hell are you talking about? You were talking about how the problem with Scuba's c/r was that it folds hands you beat. Instead, you prefer a check/calling line and leading the turn. I pointed out that I don't see how this line is superior at keeping hands that you beat in. You now rebut with . . .

[ QUOTE ]

Say you're villain, are you folding KQs (I assume you're not playing K9 /images/graemlins/grin.gif) here to my 1/2 pot bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, you mean a hand just as good as what Hero is holding? Of course I'm not folding this, but this is not at all relevant to what we were discussing. What I'd do with K9, or 77, or even 35, is the pertinent question. The whole issue is precisely what hands worse than KQ would do, since that's what we were talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care if UTG+1 has 77. If he has 77 he shouldn't be putting another dime in the pot anyway. I'm interested in extracting max value from a weaker king. You know this anyway I'm sure.

I meantioned KQs because Villain is probably oblivious to the fact that he is dominated. KQ/KJ/KT/K9 whatever they're all the same in his mind. It doesn't matter. I shouldn't have typed that, it just confuses things.

Anyway, we have a difference of opinion. I believe a C/R to 300 on the flop folds more K high hands than a call and 1/2 pot lead on the turn. That's pretty much it.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, that's what I said and posted about...what's ambiguous there

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad, too many words and commas.

[ QUOTE ]
Note that UTG+2 probably bets his full house if checked to on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my feeling on generating a "read" on UTG+2. Guess that makes me susceptible to a losing hand on the river to those genius' who check the turn.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll probably post more on this hand later. But you can't check/fold the turn yet in any event.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm interested in the rest of your thoughts...

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, we have a difference of opinion. I believe a C/R to 300 on the flop folds more K high hands than a call and 1/2 pot lead on the turn. That's pretty much it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't really think about the CR amount much. It doesn't matter, though, because whether I CR to 200 or 300 most of my stack goes in on the turn. FWIW, I make it 200 because it's nice and round and close to pot sized.

Turn: Leading out after calling does two weird things that I may or may not like. It makes anything less than a K fold, and it makes me very unhappy when I get called even though I probably have the best hand anyway. I think some people use that check/call, bet a lot more than I do. I should probably start.

Anyway, the part that's really clearcut is that you have to bet after CR'ing this much.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. CR on flop was WAY too much.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree completely, but given the fact that they are both LAGs and you did CR the flop with that type of bet I think all in on the turn is almost mandatory.

[ QUOTE ]
2. 2 calls of that CR scream of a set (I agree scuba).

[/ QUOTE ]
If they were decent players I would agree, the fact that the one shown down hand was K9 doesn't really substantiate taht claim to me.

[ QUOTE ]
IF I got into this mess, I would see how committed I was and whether I could still survive, but I dont think, in my experience, one should believe they are ahead here by any means on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
I probably flat call the flop and fold to any substantial raise or bet on any later streets. I'm weak / tight but once there's 975 chips in there, I'm up against two LAGs/calling stations &amp; I probably have the best hand...I am going to find this hard to lay down so I'd rather be the first one to put all my chips in.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed...but we dont know that they are calling stations...only was to find out here is to lose your buyin...not worth it.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Anyway, the part that's really clearcut is that you have to bet after CR'ing this much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this based on a default read of $50 players at Party? Perhaps I misinterpreted your earlier comment, but I thought that you also had the feeling that UTG+2 calling the first bet and then overcalling the raise smelled strongly of set. If I c/r less, this overcall means less, and I'm less concerned about his strength. So I actually think it's the substantial size of the c/r that's making me hesitate before betting here.

[adanthar]

No. If he was MP3, MP1 bet, MP2 raised and he called, the hand would be over. Because he's sandwiched in the middle, it means 'hey I want to see a turn card'. Go ahead and value bet, chances are still that he's a guppy.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When the flop is Kx2 and you are called in 2 places, what holding is more likely? Kx or x2?


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I'm hypersensitive, but I guess I thought that a set may have been completed. I was not concered at all of an x2. If someone had x2 here, they deserve to win, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
You could check/call, but I'd probably just bet 150 and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

When do you define that you're up against a set, and let a hand go? Is it with this move?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me answer this again.

With this 'bet the flop and check/fold the turn" idea, you seem to be trying to get away from this hand losing only 75 if someone has a set or 2-pair.

If someone has a set or 2-pair and you only lose 75, you played it very wrong. That's a fact.

I know this hand ended in tragedy, but don't go overboard trying to stiff out traps.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You just proved my point...you lead to same results here but can get away from the hand if you want to be done with it and still have chips to play with...Ill say it again, where I play 2 calls of a cr on the flop screams set...no ifs ands or buts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where I play, a coldcall of a bet and raise often means 'set'. A call and then another call means 'weak K' or '53' or 'well I have 5 outs so I call'.

[/ QUOTE ]

A guy calling that size cr with another to act behind him wont scare you? (I agree, the call and then a raise is more indicative of a set, I stand corrected).

All I am saying is that scuba's posting of these results has really skewed this whole discussion...besides the CR I dont see how he played the hand that badly...the river all-in is a bit suspicious on villain's part.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You just proved my point...you lead to same results here but can get away from the hand if you want to be done with it and still have chips to play with...Ill say it again, where I play 2 calls of a cr on the flop screams set...no ifs ands or buts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, but as you point out in your post here, this is a results oriented attitude to the problem. I don't think it's the case that if two players will call your min c/r, they will also necessarily call a c/r to 300. A very likely alternative is that he wins the pot on the flop or isolates.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see what your saying and point taken. But, the law of diminishing returns dictates that he can achieve getting the most efficient amount of chips here w/o setting himself up for losing more by CRing less (if CRing is the road he wishes to take...thats a seperate argument somewhere else in the thread).