Over Aggressive Here?

[SheridanCat]

It's a 5-handed 3/6 game. Online, thus the cap heads-up.

I'm in the BB. A new player (NP) joins the game and posts behind the button. I have K6o.

UTG Folds, NP checks his option, button folds, small blind folds. I check. NP and me to the flop for 2 SB.

Flop: K Q Q rainbow

I bet out. NP raises. I reraise. NP reraises, etc. Capped.

Okay, I figure he has a king and probably a better kicker, but maybe not. I'm thinking that I can represent a queen with my aggression.

Turn: [K Q Q] K

Hmm, now I assume we've each got a king and will split the pot. I guess he could have QQ, but I'm not really worried about that due to his check preflop. If he's sandbagged me, then so be it.

I bet out. He raises. Uh-oh. Here we go and it's capped again.

River is a blank low card and we cap the betting again and he's all-in. I just don't feel that slowing down makes any sense here as I'm only losing to QQ and I'm willing to pay that off.

He shows a Qx for a smaller boat.

Do you think either of us were overly aggressive here? I'm thinking I was too aggressive on the flop betting and got lucky. The chance of the guy having trip queens is the same as him having a king, so I should have slowed down.

I guess I find that a good part of my success a these low-limit short-handed tables is based in being very aggressive.

Regards,

T

[Petyos]

I think you played it well. At least that is how I would have played it. For him, though, capping it on the turn is very questionable, cause you showed strenght on the flop. And capping it on the river is downright dumb. I mean from all the action he should have been thinking that the best he can do is split the pot(unless he thinks of you as a comlete moron) or lose to a king, any king.
No i dont think you were too agressive on the flop, cause many people play many other holdings that agressively on the cheap streets. It is reasonable to assume that he could have had any pair, AJ or J10. But for him though, to keep capping it is crazy. Your reraise on the turn should have stopped him. From that point on he just should have checked and called.

[eMarkM]

I bet out. NP raises. I reraise. NP reraises, etc. Capped.

Okay, I figure he has a king and probably a better kicker, but maybe not. I'm thinking that I can represent a queen with my aggression.

When he caps the flop, why would you just assume a K with a better kicker? Unless he's just a complete maniac, which you don't know since he's NP, I would have to assume he has the Q he's representing. Doesn't mean I fold this hand HU, I'm going to a showdown, but after his show of strength I don't think trying to out macho him is the way to go.

What if the 2nd K didn't come on the turn giving you the 2nd nuts? If he has a weak K himself, I doubt he'll lie down to your aggression. I mean you weren't planning on folding even though you were the one who was actually behind without the Q. He'd likely just call you down to see the Q you're representing if you raise him again. Since he has the Q and with his capping basically told you so, I would probably have just wimpily check and called the turn and river if I didn't improve. You lose the least this way if he has the Q or better K, and if he's on a complete bluff or hand you can beat, you pick up an extra bet since he's unlikely to call another raise after all the strength you've shown if he really has zippo. I don't see how continuing to be aggressive wins you more money in this situation given the types of hands he could have. You're just asking to get reraised if he has it.

Once the K did come, you played it well by raising at every opp as I would not have feared QQ with his lack of preflop raise. He played it horribly.

[Pot-A]

Way too agressive on the flop. If you bet and he raises he's probably got you beat with Kx the worst hand he's likely to have. Heads up you call him down, expecially since he's new, but don't assume you played it right because you caught your miracle card on the turn.

Having caught the miracle card, your play is correct from the turn on, but that's a no-brainer - there isn't much chance he'll sandbag you with QQ on his first hand.

[SheridanCat]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
but don't assume you played it right because you caught your miracle card on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, I know I got lucky here.

Of course, if the miracle K hadn't come I would have check-called all the way to the showdown.

Thanks for the insight.

Regards,

T.

[SheridanCat]

Thanks to all who replied. I have gotten some good information from your responses.

Regards,

T.

[tewall]

One of the things you have to be careful about HU is not playing predictably. The aggression on the flop can be O.K. if it causes your opponent to misplay his hand on the expensive streets. Of course, you don't want to overdo it, but the general idea would be to vary your play and try to pick up reads on your opponent which you can take advantage of in later streets.

In this post here (that I'm responding to) you say that you intended to call him down if the King had not hit, but in your original post you said you were planning to represent a Queen by your aggression. These ideas seem to be contradictory.

Much of the time a poster will post a hand and ask for a critique of the action. The important thing is not the action took, but the thinking behind it. A world class player and a novice can make the same play for completely different reasons. Whether the aggression was good or bad depends a lot on the thinking behind it.

A good thing about your post is did point out what you were thinking.