KK with coordinated flop

[Miah]

Online 3-6:

I'm dealt K /images/graemlins/heart.gif K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in the small blind

2 EP's callers, 1 mp caller, I raise it to $6, BB and limpers call.

5 see flop for 2 bets a peice:

Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif T /images/graemlins/club.gif 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif

Not the best of flops but there's still a good chance I'm ahead so I bet out, BB calls, EP makes it $6 and its folded to me. I think for a sec and decide there's a bunch of hands he could be raising on here that I'm beating so I decide to make it $9. BB folds and EP calls, its heads up.

Turn: 5 /images/graemlins/heart.gif

I bet and get called.

River: 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I check hoping to catch a bluff, he bets and I call.

Results to follow this evening.

[Vehn]

River: 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I check hoping to catch a bluff, he bets and I call.

^^^ YM "I check hoping he'll bet so I can checkraise and win more money". HTH.

[Homer]

I check hoping to catch a bluff, he bets and I call.

Why do you think he must be on a PURE draw? I could see him having QJ, QT, Q9, T9, JT, J9, Q8, T8, 98, KT, KQ, K9, all of which you beat, and all of which will call a river bet (assuming your opponent is a typical non-solid player) but may not bet when checked to.

Checking on the river to induce a bluff is a far better play when the board does not contain as many cards in the "playing zone". In this situation it is likely that your opponent caught a piece of the flop in addition to a draw (if he has a draw at all), something that has showdown value. In such a case it is much better to bet, since your opponent will not make a desperation bet when checked to, something he might consider doing with only a busted draw.

I'll be damned -- I had an original thought.

-- Homer

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
Checking on the river to induce a bluff is a far better play when the board does not contain as many cards in the "playing zone".

[/ QUOTE ]

Havent thought about it like this. Good point.

I would bet out on river. I think he will call you more often then he will bet behind if you check.

[lil']

This seems like a time to bet your hand for value, not indce a bluff.

[Miah]

I completely misplayed the hand on all streets except preflop. My opponent had QT for floped top two in which I proceeded to river him. I didn't put him on two pair due to his complete passiveness post-flop. Silly me, I forgot who I'm playing with sometimes.

When I was the dog I was the aggressor, when I had the best hand I was the wuss. I should have realized how much that 5 helped me and c/r and/or value bet the river.

BTW if he would have popped me on the turn I would have laid it down, I forgot to include that in my original post when commenting on the turn.

[lil']

You didn't misplay the flop or turn. Betting was correct!

[Miah]

Not according to the fundamental theorum of poker /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Bob T.]

I think you did fine. With a coordinated board, there are a lot of draws, that might be raising for a free card or value, and anyone with top pair, would be raising to protect their hand, so I think that a three bet on the flop, is almost a mandatory play. If you don't make that raise, I would think that you played the hand poorly.

[JTG51]

Bob, are you saying you think the river play was OK? The 5 was maybe the second best card he could have hoped for (behind only a non club J). Checking and just calling the river was a big mistake.

[GuyOnTilt]

I'm going to take a stab at this one...

You're referring to the "bet/raise when ahead in the hand; check/fold when you're behind" type of thing, correct? Well, I guess if you could've seen your opponent's cards, then you're right, you misplayed the flop, turn, and river. But since he didn't turn his cards faceup, you played perfectly until the river, where you should've bet out. Sounds from your Results post that you're being results oriented in looking back at your decisions during the hand. If your had bet the river, you would've played the hand perfectly IMO.

But then again, I'm not the most pokerest of pokerers.

[Bob T.]

Well, I guess I let him off the hook for that play, because his opponent made his bet for him, and he wasn't ever going to get two bets on the river. I didn't really like the river play, but I thought that the three bet on the flop was a key play, because it let him maintain control of the hand.

[Miah]

I understand 100%, and this is my philosophy. I was semi-kidding around and probably just used poor wording.

To be completely honest I didn't realise how the 5 pairing the board (or that it did pair the board, giving me 2 pair) impacted the situation. When I checked on the end the upgrade of my hand to two pair had not registered in my mind and I was checking my overpair. Had I realized what had happened I would have most certainly bet out, I highly doubt I would have gone for a check raise in that situation.

I guess this brings up another situation, if the board did not pair on the end and was a card of insignificant rank/suit, would the optimal river play still have been to bet out?

[JTG51]

I guess this brings up another situation, if the board did not pair on the end and was a card of insignificant rank/suit, would the optimal river play still have been to bet out?

Yes.