KQs, standard value betting or overplayed?

[madscout]

5/10 limit full ring

Preflop

Hero is dealt Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif in MP1
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, Hero raises, 2 calls in LP, SB folds, BB calls, UTG+1 3-bets...

More often than AA or KK, this raise from the EP limper means "It's fun to build a large pot and I have suited connectors LOL!!1" Hey, so do I!

Hero caps*, everyone calls. *SSHE PF quiz #10

Flop (20 SBs): 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif (5 players)

UTG+1 bets...

In some small pot situations I think this is borderline between calling and blowing away the field by raising. This is not such a pot... people are going to call 2-cold if they are going to call 1.

Hero raises, 3 calls, UTG+1 3-bets, Hero caps, 4 calls.

Turn (20 BBs): K/images/graemlins/heart.gif (5 players)

BB bets, UTG+1 calls...

This concerns me quite a bit. I have shown infinite strength thus far and all of a sudden the big blind bets into the field. This seems like a flopped set that has been laying in the weeds waiting springing to life. However, I don't care... there are plenty of hands that I want to fold behind me in case BB is full of [censored]. If he really does have the goods, oh well, I still have outs.

Hero raises, 2 folds, BB calls, UTG+1 calls.

River (26 BBs): 9/images/graemlins/club.gif (3 players)

2 checks, Hero bets, 2 calls.

Final Pot: 29 BBs

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

so for each street:

Preflop: pretty standard. /images/graemlins/smile.gif
flop: standard. /images/graemlins/grin.gif
turn: standard hand protection... /images/graemlins/confused.gif
river: standard value bet... /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[W. Deranged]

Nice hand.

[PokerBob]

What do you need to fold out behind you on the turn? A naked 5 or 6? If you are giving BB a set, raising the turn here sucks.

[brettbrettr]

I, too, do not understand the turn raise.

[W. Deranged]

I don't think there's any reason to concede a set yet to BB. Lot's of players will play overcards way to far and might well lead the turn when they pick up their overcard. The turn raise is for value in my opinion, given the equity cushion from the big flush draw in addition to a very solid top pair hand. (The advantage of perhaps folding a gutshot or a random ace is nice, but not the primary reason for the raise, in my opinion...)

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
in case BB is full of [censored]. If he really does have the goods, oh well, I still have outs.


[/ QUOTE ]

If BB is full of it, he may fold to your raise. If he has the set, he has more cards to improve his hand than you.

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you need to fold out behind you on the turn? A naked 5 or 6? If you are giving BB a set, raising the turn here sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not necessarily giving BB a set here, I'm just saying it is one of his possible holdings. He could have also made two pair, or a weaker top pair.

I thought it was more important to fold out anyone drawing to a gutshot, ace, or two pair than to be worried about getting 3-bet by the BB. If I get 3-bet, I still have outs so it is not a disaster.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What do you need to fold out behind you on the turn? A naked 5 or 6? If you are giving BB a set, raising the turn here sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not necessarily giving BB a set here, I'm just saying it is one of his possible holdings. He could have also made two pair, or a weaker top pair.

I thought it was more important to fold out anyone drawing to a gutshot, ace, or two pair than to be worried about getting 3-bet by the BB. If I get 3-bet, I still have outs so it is not a disaster.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let them draw to the gutshot. One of their outs is filthy. With the pot as big as it is, a raise doesn't protect you from gutshots anyway.

[W. Deranged]

I am very interested by the claims that this is not an obvious turn raise. Would someone advocating this line mind summarizing why a raise is bad here. I understand that this is a "having outs on the turn" situation, but why do none of the rest of these apply:

1. VALUE: Hero has top pair, good kicker here. Pre-flop three-better slowed down on the turn when the king hit. BB need not have a set but could likely be betting a weaker king.

2. HAND PROTECTION/ BIG POT AGGRESSIVENESS: A raise might not numerically protect you from gutshots or aces, but they may fold anyway, which is good for you. Not all players know the numbers! A tactical raise here gives opponents with live outs the chance to make a bad fold. The pot is huge and so any measure that might slightly increase your chance of winning the hand cannot be awful.

3. FREE SHOWDOWN/RIVER ACTION: Raising the turn might make the river easier to play. You could perhaps check behind on the river if you don't think you'll be ahead a majority of the time, without facing a bet/overcall or bet/raise on the river which might open up the opportunity to fold the best hand.


With all this, plus the equity cushion from all of your outs (which would seem to be at least 18%), I am very much at a loss to see why a raise is a bad play here and why, in fact, it might not be very much the best play. (If the pot remains three-handed, if you can get to 33% equity from your draws and your likelihood of being ahead, a raise is straight up profitable.)

Just a thought.

[Malcom Reynolds]

If you have a read that UTG+1 limp-reraises often with nothing, then your play is fine. I want to point out that this situation is different from the hand quizzes. In the hand quiz, there were a few limpers in front of the limp-reraiser, so he has no reason to limp-reraise with AA or KK since he already has limpers he can trap for an extra bet, plus there are fewer people behind him that could possibly raise.

When someone limps up front and pulls the reraising move, there is less chance he is full of crap. I'm just saying that against an unknown, it would be irresponsible to completely discount AA or KK from an UTG limper.

Great play on the flop, pushing that equity edge. With UTG+1 still 3-betting on the flop, his hand range thins a bit more and there is a higher chance he has that overpair now.

Just call the turn, what are you trying to accomplish by raising here? There is a reasonably good chance you're drawing here and even if you want to protect your hand here, you can't.

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have a read that UTG+1 limp-reraises often with nothing, then your play is fine. I want to point out that this situation is different from the hand quizzes. In the hand quiz, there were a few limpers in front of the limp-reraiser, so he has no reason to limp-reraise with AA or KK since he already has limpers he can trap for an extra bet, plus there are fewer people behind him that could possibly raise.

When someone limps up front and pulls the reraising move, there is less chance he is full of crap. I'm just saying that against an unknown, it would be irresponsible to completely discount AA or KK from an UTG limper.

Great play on the flop, pushing that equity edge. With UTG+1 still 3-betting on the flop, his hand range thins a bit more and there is a higher chance he has that overpair now.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are all very good points. Would AA slowdown on the turn? KK certainly would not. QQ probably would. Is a turn raise still bad after UTG+1 just calls?

[Malcom Reynolds]

[ QUOTE ]
These are all very good points. Would AA slowdown on the turn? KK certainly would not. QQ probably would. Is a turn raise still bad after UTG+1 just calls?

[/ QUOTE ]

Those are good questions, but don't forget about BB that suddenly woke up on the turn after preflop and flop has been capped. BB could have made a real hand here, and UTG+1 could be ahead. Of course you could have the best hand, but there is reasonable uncertainty here plus raising doesn't protect your hand, and it only gains extra value if there is a good chance you are ahead.

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
plus raising doesn't protect your hand

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it does. If you were in LP with 79s (not diamonds) and you somehow got to the turn, would you call getting 12:1 with 0-3 outs? How about if you were getting 23:1? I think the difference is considerable.

[Malcom Reynolds]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it does. If you were in LP with 79s (not diamonds) and you somehow got to the turn, would you call getting 12:1 with 0-3 outs? How about if you were getting 23:1? I think the difference is considerable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Those hands with 0 or 1 outs don't have odds obviously. Hands that may have 2 or 3 outs probably need to have outs discounted. With the play of BB and UTG+1, you have to mix in the chances they are drawing dead or not all of their outs are outs.

I think that while there may be a few hands that truly have 2 outs here, between discounting outs and the good chance you are drawing, I still make this a call. Just because those hands may exist doesn't mean it's likely you are up against them; there are very few hands you actually successfully protect yourself from.

If I felt there was a better chance you were ahead at this point, I'd be able to recommend a raise.

[belloc]

[ QUOTE ]
2. HAND PROTECTION/ BIG POT AGGRESSIVENESS: A raise might not numerically protect you from gutshots or aces, but they may fold anyway, which is good for you. Not all players "know the numbers"! A tactical raise here gives opponents with live outs the chance to make a bad fold. The pot is huge and so any measure that might slightly increase your chance of winning the hand cannot be awful.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll just comment on this one. It doesn't matter whether they know the numbers if they do the right thing for the wrong reason.

Your job is to get them to make mistakes when possible. If they call when it's correct to call (in this case, if a calling station cold calls two bets to his gutshot when the pot is big enough for it to be correct to do so), then they haven't made a mistake, even though they didn't know it. The play they make by nature turns out to be the correct play, and your raise hasn't made them make a mistake.

Yes, they may fold incorrectly to your "tactical raise". But if they're loose and passive, it's more likely that they'll just call anyway, correctly but without knowing it.

[W. Deranged]

Certainly this may happen, but you can force your opponent to choose from less attractive options. Not raising allows your opponent to call one bet, which will be a very +EV call (regardless of whether they know it). Raising forces them to choose a less profitable, if still +EV, call, or an incorrect fold.

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
Let them draw to the gutshot. One of their outs is filthy. With the pot as big as it is, a raise doesn't protect you from gutshots anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't see how this can be correct. If they are drawing to a gutshot, then my raise is for value if not to protect my hand.

Please explain the logic behind:

"let them draw to the gutshot (for one bet in a 23 BB pot)".

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let them draw to the gutshot. One of their outs is filthy. With the pot as big as it is, a raise doesn't protect you from gutshots anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't see how this can be correct. If they are drawing to a gutshot, then my raise is for value if not to protect my hand.

Please explain the logic behind:

"let them draw to the gutshot (for one bet in a 23 BB pot)".

[/ QUOTE ]

Cuz you may be behind anyway (as you seem to have thought) and getting 3-bet would really suck IMO.

[baronzeus]

I'd pop a raise on the river. He's playing his cards like he has an overpair between a 88-QQ.

Plus, you are less likely to get 3bet here.

Plus, you only need to be ahead like 20-30% or something for it to be right. (I think?)

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd pop a raise on the river. He's playing his cards like he has an overpair between a 88-QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

You misread the action. I bet the river.

[Hamlet]

I like the turn raise, but I think checking the river makes sense after they both call. Either could have you beat, but you've shown so much strength that AA or AK or two pair may fear KK.

I think the turn raise is very good. You'll fold out hands like 7x or Ax behind you, and if you're behind you can take a free river. With your outs and another caller, you're not losing that much when you get three-bet.

[TStoneMBD]

dont like the turn raise and i dont like the river value bet

[shant]

I think you either raise the turn and check behind the river or call down.

[callmedonnie]

[ QUOTE ]
I, too, do not understand the turn raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

He thought a set was possible, but remember the protect hand in case Big blind is "full of sh!t"

[alul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
plus raising doesn't protect your hand

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it does. If you were in LP with 79s (not diamonds) and you somehow got to the turn, would you call getting 12:1 with 0-3 outs? How about if you were getting 23:1? I think the difference is considerable.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I have 79s (not diamonds) and somehow got to the turn, you cannot protect your hand against me, 'cause I'm very loose and not folding /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd pop a raise on the river. He's playing his cards like he has an overpair between a 88-QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

You misread the action. I bet the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he meant raise the river instead of the turn. But I wouldn't do either. I'd call the turn and call the river. I don't like the turn raise, although it's an easy fold to a 3-bet.

[istewart]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd pop a raise on the river. He's playing his cards like he has an overpair between a 88-QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

You misread the action. I bet the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he meant raise the river instead of the turn. But I wouldn't do either. I'd call the turn and call the river. I don't like the turn raise, although it's an easy fold to a 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not with a flush draw.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]

Not with a flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa, totally missed that part. That makes me dislike the turn raise even more. If we're behind, a number of river cards can improve us to the best hand, so there's no reason to raise/fold the turn. I'm calling the turn, and raising the river improved -- calling unimproved.

[Luke]

I understand some of the posters dislike of the turn raise but as long as there's at least a reasonable chance you are ahead of the BB, I think the raise is fine.

You have 2 players after you who if you just call, will be clearly correct to call with 2 and 3 outers (pocket pairs, gutshots, naked aces, etc). By raising, you badly injure their odds and possibly cause them to make a mistake.

Luke

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
If we're behind, a number of river cards can improve us to the best hand, so there's no reason to raise/fold the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You have 2 players after you who if you just call, will be clearly correct to call with 2 and 3 outers (pocket pairs, gutshots, naked aces, etc). By raising, you badly injure their odds and possibly cause them to make a mistake.


[/ QUOTE ]

I believe this is a good reason to raise.

[cassady]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in case BB is full of [censored]. If he really does have the goods, oh well, I still have outs.


[/ QUOTE ]

If BB is full of it, he may fold to your raise. If he has the set, he has more cards to improve his hand than you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but I don't think this is so much of an issue. Only two of your outs are dirty (K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif). All other cards which give you your flush don't pair the board, and there's only one card to come. You'll know if you've improved to best hand, or not. It's not like you're open to redraws.

[cassady]

[ QUOTE ]


I'll just comment on this one. It doesn't matter whether they know the numbers if they do the right thing for the wrong reason.

Your job is to get them to make mistakes when possible. If they call when it's correct to call (in this case, if a calling station cold calls two bets to his gutshot when the pot is big enough for it to be correct to do so), then they haven't made a mistake, even though they didn't know it. The play they make by nature turns out to be the correct play, and your raise hasn't made them make a mistake.

Yes, they may fold incorrectly to your "tactical raise". But if they're loose and passive, it's more likely that they'll just call anyway, correctly but without knowing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

What you're missing here is this:
a). calling one bet is correct.
b). calling two bets is correct.
but:
c). calling two bets is less correct for them than calling one bet.

Or put it another way. 1/10 times they'll win the extra bet your force, 9 in 10 times, you'll take an extra bet of theirs.

Just because them calling two bets is still +EV for them, it doesn't mean putting in that extra bet isn't +EV for you.