Overpair Fearing a Set

[gavrilo]

This is a hand played by a friend of mine in a $200NL online game with $1/2 Blinds. I did not see the hand and have no hand history so I'm going off what he told me.

Hero is on the button with KK
An EP raise to $10, Mp caller, Hero makes it $35, EP fold, MP calls. HU to the flop, both had around $230-240 stack to begin with, no information is provided about MP.

Flop is QJx
MP check/calls a pot-sized bet by hero.
So there is now somewhere around $240 in this pot leaving both of them with around $125 left.

Then turn was a low card putting a two flush out.

Mp checked, Hero checked.

Hero said he checked because he thought the guy had JJ or QQ. I think hero needs to push in here on the turn. Holding the guy to just two holdings when he does nothing but call throughout the hand is giving way too much credit(in this game I think it is).

If the guy did have QQ or JJ, I think his preflop call is very borderline with the size of the stacks here thus I think it's likely he would also call preflop with other holdings, does that make sense?

Also, the pot on the flop is around $240 if MP calls leaving only $125 behind, seems unlikely, although not impossible that he would be slowplaying here.

What do you think?
I do not know the results of this hand yet.

[Richie Rich]

I understand his concern. On that flop, he's losing to AA, QQ, & JJ, and only ahead of AK. These are the most likely hands EP would be holding, since he made a raise from EP and called your buddy's "significant" re-raise. (Obviously he would be tied if villain had the other KK, but that isn't likely.)

So your friend tested the waters and bet the pot on the flop, to which the opponent check-called. Do you think the villain would check-call the pot bet with AK? Seems pretty unlikely to me. No doubt I would be weary of EP slowplaying a better hand at this point -- although, if villain was holding AA, he may be worried that your friend is holding QQ/JJ. In this scenario, if EP checked again on the river, I would be happy to check behind (since > 80% of the time, only a winning hand would call or c/r).

[gavrilo]

Opponent in this hand did not raise preflop. There was an EP raise in which this player flat called.

[shadow29]

Why not QJ?

[gavrilo]

I suppose you can't really rule out any holding here since we know nothing of the opponent but that would be some preflop call with QJ.

[tewall]

If the other guy bet, your friend would be getting 3 to 1 on his call. No way he can fold that. Since he's not going to fold, he might as well bet. If the other guy is behind, make him pay to catch up. If he folds, that'd be great too (wouldn't hold my breath).

So betting gains when your friend is ahead, and loses nothing when behind, since any hand that beats your friend is going to put him all in anyway.

[gavrilo]

I agree

[theBruiser500]

The only hand "hero" (or since it's gavrillo's friend - I prefer to think of him as a villian) can beat is AQ. With AQ MP3 would probably just check it down on the river, I'd consider checking and then calling a small river bet or folding to an all in.

[theBruiser500]

Pot odds can be used to justify a lot of weak calls, in this hand if the dude leads out into "villian" all in, I'd say there's quite a good chance he's beat.

[gavrilo]

I find it quite amusing that you continue to bash me and now my friend who you don't even know. I remember you saying you hope I lose at poker. All this coming from a kid who thinks he is god at poker and played well beyond his bankroll and probably skill level and got smacked in the face.

Maybe you should post that $400NL hand where you reraised out of the SB with Q8o, flopped nothing, bet it the whole way, finally hit a gutshot on the river only to lose to a guy's flush, brilliant.

But, yes I'm the stupid idiot in this big ordeal.

[theBruiser500]

Gavrillo, this has nothing to do with bankrolls, or skill, or some stupid hand I lost - stop trying to bullshit your way through this. This has to do with us agreeing to look at each others hand histories, me commenting on 100 of your hands and you then refusing to do the same for me. A shitty low class thing to do.

[tewall]

It doesn't matter if he's probably beat. Once hero has bet the pot on the flop he has pot committed himself. He can't get away from the hand. If he wants to be able to retreat, he can't bet the pot on the flop. Having committed himself, betting the turn is better than checking because checking can gain nothing whereas betting might.

Look at it this way. What sense does it make to bet the pot and then fold the next round to a half pot bet that puts you all in? When could that ever be right? The only time I can think of would be a bluff that backfired.

Before betting the flop the better should have a plan in mind for the rest of the action. Specifically, does he intend to back this hand with his whole stack or not?

[RichSaneSwindler]

Bruiser: my problem with the play was the bet on the pot. This is a horrible pot to try to pick up, so retreating is not an option.

The flop bet was a major blunder no matter which way you slice it. Consider:

- If the table is a solid table: then, as was already pointed out, the only hands candidate hands villain has are AA, QQ, JJ, AK. Check call might be AK, but I doubt it. No other hand can call except a set, so ...

- If the table is loose aggressive, then maybe villain has TT or lower, but then he only calls on the flop with a set.

In that I think here is beat on the flop, I think he should realize his blunder and check it down.

[gavrilo]

Here's an idea Bruiser, if you feel this way about me, how about you stop reading my posts, stop responding to my posts and move on and stop bashing me??

[theBruiser500]

Sure, and how about you admit you're so pathetic you can't even follow through with a simple agreement like commenting on each others hand histories.

[george w of poker]

i'm going to assume "commenting on hand histories" is a code word for something else.

obviously, the only way to settle this is a 1k heads up match.

[gcoutu]

[ QUOTE ]
- If the table is a solid table: then, as was already pointed out, the only hands candidate hands villain has are AA, QQ, JJ, AK. Check call might be AK, but I doubt it. No other hand can call except a set, so .../quote]

Got news for all you: people don't just sit around and only play the top three hands. I have just joined this forum and everybody assumes that they are always against the AA KK AK everytime. Maybe he had KJs or KQ or QJ or nothing at all. You can't play scared all the time. I understand we have limited information about the opponent, but lets not go giving everybody credit for a set or pocket AA in every hand anaylsis.

In this case, I think you are stuck pretty deep in the pot with likely the best hand. So continue to put the pressure on the unknown with decent bet on the turn. Does anybody ever throw out the "I want a call bet" in this case maybe $40 on the turn. It may look like a stupid bet, but you will get a lot of info. Also, it further shows that you aren't folding on the river and it gives your opponent a chance to cut losses and get out. By checking you have given up, but still may call off your money.

[BeerMoney]

Good analysis. Sounds like someone from the big 3.

[tewall]

"Does anybody ever throw out the 'I want a call bet' in this case maybe $40 on the turn. It may look like a stupid bet, but you will get a lot of info."

What's the lot of info you get? If the guy raises you all-in are you going to fold for $85 when the pot is over $400?

[gcoutu]

No, the point is you are pot committed anyway. If he checks the turn and gets put all in on the river he is going to call, right? Why not throw out a small bet that looks insanely suspicious to where it looks like you are begging for a call.

Either way he is putting his chips in the middle in the end. I, personally, would move in on the turn. However, checking the turn is useless unless you are hoping for a river check too. How often is a pot bet up like this one was only to see check, check on the turn and river?

[tewall]

I agree with you about betting, and argued the point elsewhere on this thread. If you're behind, all the money's going in anyway, so you might as well get it in yourself. This is the standard play for this sort of situation, as you give your opponent a chance to make a mistake either by folding when he shouldn't or by making a bad call. So we're in agreement there.

I was only taking issue with the comment that you're betting to gain a lot of information. Information isn't relevant here, since, as you correctly pointed out, you're pot committed.

[t_petrosian]

You guys really take this seriously...Sheesh.

[gcoutu]

I guess Information was the wrong word. I think we agree on the way to follow through. I really disagree with the check on the turn. If my money is going in on the hand it is going in on the turn...unless I think I'm beat.

This game is crazy!

[tewall]

We're in agreement. Even if you think you're beat, the money still goes in, because you've already committed yourself on the flop. The time where there are options are before the flop. Once it gets to the turn, things have been decided.

I can make a good analogy of this concept in backgammon if you play backgammon, or for anyone else if they care.