PDA

View Full Version : Kicker trouble: folded to a raise


11-08-2001, 03:14 PM
Average to slightly looser than average game. I'm in the BB and get a free play in a seven way pot with Kh5h (SB folded).


The flop is T 7 2 rainbow with one diamond. It's checked around.


The turn is the Kd. I bet out. One player calls, and another, a weak-tight player, raises. The button cold calls the raise. I fold. I figured that the raiser almost certainly has me out-kicked if he has a king, and with the initial caller, plus cold caller, I can't be very happy with my situation. Either I am already beat, or there are several hands drawing to beat me, and they probably have quite a lot of collective outs between them. I don't figure it's worth calling another two big bets, especially given the rather precarious situation I'm in. Should I have played it differently?


On the river, the raiser bet again and got one caller. The raiser had KQo, and his hand was good.


Comments welcome.


Dave in Cali

11-08-2001, 03:22 PM
This play looks straight forward and I agree that you played it correctly.

11-08-2001, 04:22 PM
Between the caller, the raiser, and the cold-caller you are almost always looking at three outs at best which is a 15-to-1 shot. There are other times when you will have one of your outs killed because of the diamonds. There will be times when you are drawing dead. Furthermore, "weak-tight" (a term I detest) players don't make semi-bluff raises on the expensive street. When they raise, they have a made hand. Folding is clear.

11-08-2001, 08:28 PM
Mason, where is the value of betting the turn? (if you can't call a raise) It's pretty much guaranteed anyone with a K has you outkicked here. If you check and it comes back to you raised, obviously it's a fold and you saved a big bet. But if it comes back just one bet, you might decide to call (for the same money as the bet-fold) and be in position to spike your 3 outer.


Of course, depending on your opponents, you may not want to call the one bet either, and save the big bet for another spot.

11-08-2001, 08:51 PM
No one else has to have a King. You bet because there are 7 small bets in the middle. If someone just calls, you can probably quickly put him on a Diamond draw and try to induce a bluff on the river if a blank comes.


Even in the case of someone else having a King, it's better to bet and be raised so you can fold as opposed to checkcalling twice.


You are right that you can save a big bet if you check, see a bet and a raise thereby allowing you to fold but usually, that's not what happens i.e. it's unlikely that three players are holding a King and the case King just came down.

11-08-2001, 09:21 PM
"No one else has to have a King. You bet because there are 7 small bets in the middle. If someone just calls, you can probably quickly put him on a Diamond draw and try to induce a bluff on the river if a blank comes."


Yes, I see what you mean.


"Even in the case of someone else having a King, it's better to bet and be raised so you can fold as opposed to checkcalling twice."


Here you'll see I was pointing out that if you check and call one bet (instead of bet-fold) for the same money, you're in position to spike your kicker and maybe win the pot. (you won't be calling if you miss) So you won't be check -calling twice, but maybe check-raising on the river, heh, I know it's a long shot.


thanks for your interest, I value your thoughts highly

11-08-2001, 10:15 PM
Good Play, for all the reasons elaborated above. ;-)


I think you might want to rethink your classification scheme, though. IMHO, a weak-tight player would have just called with 1 pair and a second best kicker, especially after a caller between you. He made the right play of course, but he doesn't look weak tight from here. /images/smile.gif


Best,


zooey

11-09-2001, 11:12 AM
"...if you check and call one bet (instead of bet-fold) for the same money, you're in position to spike your kicker and maybe win the pot. (you won't be calling if you miss) So you won't be check -calling twice, but maybe check-raising on the river, heh, I know it's a long shot. "


if you're trying to spike your kicker, and won't be calling if you miss, then you are effectively drawing to a three outer in a very small pot, a terrible move. then, thinking you're going to get a check-raise in on the river is wishful thinking much of the time, IMO, you certainly don't have enough certainty of this working to count on it ahead of time. Even if you could count on the check-raise, how many callers would you be getting? It still wouldn't even come close to justifying drawing to a three outer, especially since one of your three outs is diamonds, and may not even be good.

11-09-2001, 12:51 PM
please re-read my original post, in it I suggest you may not want to even call one bet, (if you check the turn, and it comes back to you for one bet), depending on your read of your opponents left in the hand.


I'm not suggesting drawing to 3 (or 2) outers but merely pointing out for the same money as the bet and fold, you get to see the river card.(if you check and call one bet) and whether you bet or checkraise the river if you hit is really not the point.(as even if you miss, a checkraise may blow a weak-tight player off his top pair, maybe good kicker)


I guess i just have trouble sometimes with the bet and fold to the raise theory as it's possible opponents may start to run over you, and I just can't see ALWAYS leading with the crummy K.

11-09-2001, 04:34 PM
your clarification helps your position on the matter, but I was merely responding to what was quoted directly from your post. It wasn't meant to change the meaning of what you originally intended in the previous post, but it certainly wasn't clear, thus my comments. No offense meant, it's just debating. Even if I somehow could prove you absolutely and irrefutably 100% wrong, it would still just be debating, and no offense would be meant, such is the nature of writing on public forums.


I still basically don't like the check-call in that situation, at least not very often, and not against typical opponents. If you combine the chances of giving a free card to someone who would have folded for a bet, but can still outdraw you, with the chance of your being out-kicked, with the uncertainty of knowing exactly where you are at, I think you should either bet or fold. Another reason I think this is that if someone comes out betting, it may be very hard to "read" them, as many opponents would bet here with various draws they may have picked up, second pair, a better (or perhaps even worse) king, or sometimes as a pure bluff (albeit ill-advised). Only against certain specific opponents would I be more likely to check-call, otherwise, if you intend to call a bet, it is often better to bet yourself.