help with ak and top two

[evanski]

Id been playing 5-10 NL for about an hour and was up 400 bucks to a stack size of 1400 or so when this hand came up. I was 2 off the button with ak offsuit. Everyone folded to the UTG +2, who had come in to the game recently and raised to 20, the minimum raise. There was one caller between us, I called, and both blinds completed, putting the pot at about 100 bucks. The flop came ak6, rainbow. The original raiser checked, the player in front of me bet 35, I raised to 100. Everyone folded to the original raiser, who reraised to 300. The player between us folded, and it was back around to me. The minimum raise preflop reeks of a big pair, but it is also incredibly unlikely given the ak in my hand and on the board. The 6 is too small to be relevant for a set. After thinking about it a while I folded, realizing that the most I could hope for is a split pot. When I showed my cards, I was told by the majority of the table that I was out of mind. Any thoughts?

[Gildersneeze]

If there's a much better situation to get your money in than top two flopped pair, I'd really like to know what it is.

If you had him stacked by at least double and layed this down, I'm sorry, but that IS crazy.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

You advertising this monster laydown is begging for trouble.

[Gildersneeze]

Let me append my statement about getting the money in to "In this particular hand, if there's a better place to get all your money in, I'd like to know what it is."

Especially when you consider the pre-flop min-raise and the blinds just calling along. Also, with the min-raise, I'd worry MUCH more about the set of Sixes than a set of Aces or Kings. At this point in the hand, it's VERY likely that you're way ahead; I'm putting the other guy on either top pair with a Queen or Jack kicker, or a weaker two-pair.

Also, why is the most you could hope for a split pot? If you split to another AK, it's a hell of a lot better than losing $120 of your chips. This play is WAY too tight.

Sorry to seem a bit harsh, but I thought about this one some more after posting earlier, and it really stuck out to me as a really weak play. I felt I should justify my statement a bit more.

[evanski]

I completely disagree. This is not some NL 25 game on party poker. These are good players who would not come back over the top of me without a hand that beats me, or with some kind of bluff. I also find it very unlikely that he would have made a min raise preflop with sixes. I also find it unlikely that he would check raise with a hand as weak as AJ or AQ. I think if he had either of these he would have lead at the pot. My whole point here is that if hes not bluffing, Im beat. If I come back over the top of him and he calls, Im either splitting the pot or drawing dead. There is a possibility that hes bluffing, and that if I came back over the top he would fold, but I dont know anything about him and wasnt willing to risk my entire stack in the hopes that he was bluffing. Thoughts?

[zeero3]

My guess is the guy's holding 66 and flopped his set. However, if you DID have him covered by a huge margin it would have been very hard for me to fold this. Tough lay-down.

[Gildersneeze]

Okay, even if you're against a set of ANY of those cards, you have outs. If it's the lower sets, an ace (or in the case of the sixes, an ace OR a king) gives you a better full house. If it's aces, while it's ridiculously long odds and highly unlikely (i.e., don't bet on it), running kings can hit, giving you quads.

If it's two pair, you will likely either split, or win. If they have A6 or K6 (and if you're saying they're tight, that's unlikely) all they can hit is a six to win.

I'm just saying laying down top two pair in this situation is weak. The way the hand played, it looks more to me like this guy's trying to steal this pot right out from under your nose with an underpair, top pair, or a weaker two-pair, and unless you know what his cards were (as in, he showed), I'm going to lay five bucks on it that he did.

[hhboy77]

in general, showing your cards is trouble and in this situation it is suicidal. if you're generally a solid player, aggressive players are going to try and take pots away from you. it's the downside of being a tight player. don't encourage people to do it because it works a lot. you don't make enough monsters to fight back against a lot of reraises.

i don't think it's a bad laydown. it seems likely to me that he has a set of kings. however, top two isn't a hand that you can just lay down every time you suspect a set. he better be pretty solid. you have to figure the other player bet out with an ace, which would make aces impossible. (it also means only 3 outs against 66 and 1 out against kk)

my problem is that you make a couple of dangerous assumptions. one is that as a bigger game the players are better than in a $25 pp game. often times the players are better but sometimes they're just richer. don't give credit to people just because they're in a bigger game. yesterday, i sat in a 9-18 game with a bunch of arrogant players that was worse than your average 3-6 game.

second, the min raise reeks of big pair. it's true for certain players but not for everyone. what were his typical raises like? also how deep is his stack? if the raise to 300 puts him all in, you might want to call - and pray. i get the impression he's much deeper.

[kurtcobain]

i see a lot of people min raising with small pairs and suited connectors. He probably had a set of sixes or was check-raise semi-bluffing.

[tewall]

Why would you show your hand? The laydown can be debated, but showing it is unquestionably bad.

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
I completely disagree. This is not some NL 25 game on party poker. These are good players who would not come back over the top of me without a hand that beats me, or with some kind of bluff. I also find it very unlikely that he would have made a min raise preflop with sixes. I also find it unlikely that he would check raise with a hand as weak as AJ or AQ. I think if he had either of these he would have lead at the pot. My whole point here is that if hes not bluffing, Im beat. If I come back over the top of him and he calls, Im either splitting the pot or drawing dead. There is a possibility that hes bluffing, and that if I came back over the top he would fold, but I dont know anything about him and wasnt willing to risk my entire stack in the hopes that he was bluffing. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

"These are good players" followed at the end by "I dont know anything about him" seem to be contradictory statements. If hitting top two pair w/AK is something you're willing to lay down in this scenario, maybe you should've mucked it preflop.

[fsuplayer]

I agree with Tewall, that your laydown can be debated...although at that game level, with that betting I think you are in big trouble. Although most of us would not play it that way, the villian could have min raised pf with any of the holdings. I just cant see you being ahead many hands here, given the way it was played.

To everyone who says he should have called, what the heck hands could the villian have to play it this way...AQ?

From the villian's point of view:
I minraise UTG with AQ...
Flop: AK6...great flop for me, lets see what happens...
MP bets small, LP comes over the top big...
hey, this seems like a great time for a pot commiting CR with only one pair out of position...

You see, unless the guy is a complete duffer (excuse the golf term), there is no way he will play any hand that AK will beat in this manner.

Very good laydown, but completely nullified by showing it to the crowd. Poker is a game of incomplete information. The player who wins the most long run is one who utilizes the information that is not apparent to everyone else (reads, betting patters etc.) Why give free information, esp. info that has guys trying to take shots at you indefinately now?

I hope you will adjust your game when playing again with these guys, and be prepare to close your eyes and call on some hands, bc they will try to bluff and semi bluff you MUCH more.

Good luck!

FsuPlayer

[turnipmonster]

[ QUOTE ]
I completely disagree. This is not some NL 25 game on party poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is an excellent point, that I think a lot of people miss.

--turnipmonster

[JrJordan]

I think you'd be in a mauch better position information wise if you reraise preflop. The villain's minraise reeks of either slowplayed big pair or weak suited connector/small pair. If you reraise you can determine which he has. If he goes over the top, then you can safely fold, losing the bare minimum. If he calls, then most likely your two pair on the flop is a winner. If you play this more aggressive PF then you take control and win the hand.

[fsuplayer]

Evanski-
In the end, well played and even better analysis, i like the way you think.
Welcome to the forum and keep the posts coming!
We could use some more high limit NL posts in this forum.

FsuPlayer

Ps You know by now I'm sure, but never sure your hand unless you will make more money later (ie a bluff).

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone folded to the UTG +2, who had come in to the game recently and raised to 20, the minimum raise.....The minimum raise preflop reeks of a big pair

[/ QUOTE ]
if he just sat down why does his raise reek of anything? was this a full game? was his stack 1000?

[ QUOTE ]
Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]
if you need to make heroic folds.... don't show them. if they know you will lay down top-two to resistance you could be opening up a can of something bad.

as for the hand itself... tough to say without a read on how solid this person is. i think an argument could be made for all of the available options....but i certainly like folding the least without more info. since i have position, i would have no problem flat calling and seeing what he does on the turn and then re-evaluating.

[tewall]

The whole question of showing cards is an interesting one. On WPT they polled different people, and there were good players on both sides of the question. Dewey Tompkins, for example, is on the never show your cards side. Daniel N., Jennifer Harmon and many others will show their cards for certain effects.

If you are a tight player, it may make sense to show a good hand when an opponent folds to re-inforce the image that you are tight, so you can steal some pots with bluffs (or maybe get paid off big time when you enter in early position with an unexpected hand). Conversely if you have a wild image, but actually play tighter than people think, you might show a bluff.

But to show a laydown doesn't seem like it can possibly gain. It just says I can be bluffed out of pots.

The replay of Foxwoods showed a guy, Mohammed was his name I think, make a lay-down of 2 pair against Hoyt something when a possible flush was showing. The laydown was terrible, and to make it worse, he showed it. The best part was the reaction shot they showed of Daniel N. and Ted Forrest, who looked like they had just smelled a dead skunk when they way what Mohammed had thrown away.

[MasterShakes]

The minimum raise in almost any level of NLHE indicates to me, well... nothing much. I can't give him credit for AA or KK, because I think just about anybody would have raised more. I think the same with AK, suited or not. I have to put him on AQ, AJ, or AT - suited or not (not like it matters). I agree that you can't put him on 66. I think a split pot is a worst case scenario and I push in here.