Party 2/4: Playing 99 UTG against a HU coldcaller.

[chesspain]

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed)

Opponent in this hand plays preflop a bit passively and coldcalls too much. Her post-flop play is unremarkable for Party 2/4.

Preflop: chesspain is UTG with 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="CC3333">chesspain raises</font>, <font color="666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+2 calls, <font color="666666">7 folds</font>,

Flop: (5.50 SB) 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif, 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
<font color="CC3333">chesspain bets</font>, UTG+2 calls.

Turn: (3.75 BB) T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
<font color="CC3333">chesspain bets</font>, UTG+2 calls.

River: (5.75 BB) K/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
<font color="CC3333">chesspain bets</font>, <font color="CC3333">UTG+2 raises</font>, chesspain calls.

Final Pot: 9.75 BB
<font color="green">Main Pot: 9.75 BB, between chesspain and UTG+2.</font> &gt; <font color="white">Pot won by UTG+2 (9.75 BB).</font>

Results in white below: <font color="white">
chesspain shows 9s 9d (two pair, kings and nines).
UTG+2 shows Ks Qc (three of a kind, kings).
Outcome: UTG+2 wins 9.75 BB. </font>

[DeeJ]

This isn't the same one who gave out about quad 6's is it?

I would fold to the river raise. She's not frightened by the K on the flop and loves it at the river. She isn't chasing a flush with that river raise.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
This isn't the same one who gave out about quad 6's is it?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it isn't.

[SpaceAce]

Can you really imagine a player with an "unremarkable" post-flop strategy raising this river with a hand that doesn't beat pocket nines? I cannot see that. The pot is biggish but I don't think you're good here anywhere near 1:9 times.

SpaceAce

[sthief09]

he plays passively and you still call his river raise? what could a passive player possibly raise with that doesn't beat you?

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
he plays passively and you still call his river raise? what could a passive player possibly raise with that doesn't beat you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I said that she played passively preflop, meaning that she would coldcall with many hands and not raise hands like AJo in EMP after one limper. I didn't have a good handle on her post-flop play. I'm a little surprised that everyone thinks it's a poor idea to invest one more bet, getting 9:1, to see her hand, especially after the second king hit.

Would everyone still say to fold if I had JJ or QQ, since both still lose to a K?

[Kluddeludde]

Looks fine til you called his river raise.

Kludde

[BigEndian]

I rather like their play. Especially if they know you to be aggresive. I think you need to re-assess your notes on this player post flop.

I would like to say I lay this river down most of the time, but I have my moments when I think everyones taking a shot at me that I'll call this river raise.

- Jim

[Gramps]

Maybe you've seen this opponent call you down on the River with some garbage hands (bottom pair, small pockets, Ace high), but I'd check and try and induce a bluff from a busted flush draw...or hope that a better hand (like a pair of tens), will check behind.

Against a King, you're going to get raised about 99% of the time. Since you intend to pay off a raise, betting will cost you an extra BB if your opponent has a King.

Against a Ten, I'd say the chance of folding out that better hand is about 0% (especially since the Kings paired on the end, your opponent is thinking you don't have a King). However, if you check, the Ten might also check behind (maybe they think you'll C/R, maybe the fear a pocket pair above tens, or a ten with a better kicker.)

You're folding JJ or QQ approx. 0% of the time with a bet, but again there is a chance those hands could check behind. Some players (maybe not this one) may even raise you on the end when they see the Kings pair with one of these hands (or AT).

If your opponent has a busted flush draw and no pair, she won't call a bet but may bet if checked to.

Maybe your opponent has been chasing with a 6 or pocket pair less than 9 and will call your bet on the end, but any +EV from this scenario seems far outweighed by the -EV in the above scenarios...IMHO.

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a little surprised that everyone thinks it's a poor idea to invest one more bet, getting 9:1, to see her hand, especially after the second king hit.

Would everyone still say to fold if I had JJ or QQ, since both still lose to a K?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is that surprising? 9:1 is meaningless when the chance of your hand being good is probably closer to 50:1. Also, how does the second King change anything? A second King on the board does not vastly decrease the chances of your opponent having a King. Try to looks at things from your opponent's point of view: You raised pre-flop then bet a King-high flop. Your opponent calls and calls again when you bet the turn. Your opponent is playing her cards passively because she knows you could be sitting on AK, AA or KK. Or, maybe she is just content to let you bet away chips while she feels she has a good chance of being ahead. Now a third King comes on the river and your opponent raises you. Why would she do that? She would do that because now she knows you don't have KK, your AA is beaten and the chances of you having AK are reduced. You can beat a bluff and not much else. All this talk about Kings is moot, anyway, because she doesn't need a King to beat you. Still, her play reeks of a weak King (although it turned out not to be so weak).

I always like to ask myself why I think an opponent is doing something. In this case, all of the answers I come up with except for "total bluff" beat 99.

SpaceAce