QTs with QKK board against a LAG

Soggy Salmon · #1 06-28-2004, 09:10 PM

What do you think of this? I played it a bit differently than I normally would.

UTG seems pretty passive, BB likes to cap preflop with cards he thinks are pretty and will bet/raise with any piece of the board.

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG calls, Hero calls, 2 folds, MP3 calls, 1 fold, Button calls, SB completes, BB (LAGarooni) raises, UTG calls, Hero calls, MP3 calls, Button calls, SB folds.

Flop: (11 SB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (5 players)
LAGarooni bets, UTG calls, Hero calls, MP3 calls, Button folds.

Turn: (7.50 BB) K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (4 players)
LAGarooni bets, UTG calls, Hero calls, MP3 folds.

River: (10.50 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (3 players)
LAGarooni bets, UTG calls, Hero raises, LAGarooni calls, UTG folds.

Final Pot: 15.50 BB
Main Pot: 15.50 BB, between LAGarooni and Hero.

blackaces13 · #2 06-28-2004, 09:20 PM

It looks strange at first but the more I think about it the more it makes sense. The river raise is interesting and you'd hate to be 3-bet by a maniac who has you beat so I think calling it down in this particular instance isn't a bad way to go either.

Its an interesting hand, raising the flop, calling it down, and working in a raise on the expensive streets all seem reasonable. I hope some others respond to this one.

RED_RAIN · #3 06-28-2004, 11:27 PM

QTs UTG+1 needs good post flop play. You are calling down middle pair so you really don't think BB or UTG have a K even with a weak kicker. Given the action not UTG but maybe BB and he didn't 3 bet on river since he has no kicker. I don't like your river raise as you don't even have QJ which will often be shown to you if not AQ.

Soggy Salmon · #4 06-29-2004, 12:14 AM

Did you read my description of BB? I was pretty damn sure I was ahead of him the whole way. My only question was where to raise to get the most from him and UTG also.

RED_RAIN · #5 06-29-2004, 12:31 AM

Yes I did. I found your description of the BB to mean pretty much nothing. What the heck are pretty cards? What makes you think you are beating UTG? If you are so confident, do it on the turn, as almost always.

Soggy Salmon · #6 06-29-2004, 01:17 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I found your description of the BB to mean pretty much nothing. What the heck are pretty cards?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you are that dense, so you must be being contrary.

[ QUOTE ]
What makes you think you are beating UTG? If you are so confident, do it on the turn, as almost always.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was sure I was ahead of UTG on the turn. He had two chances to show me otherwise. Even though he was passive, he would have raised with a K. He could have Qx but I already have one and I am pretty sure BB has another. Not likely all four Q are in play.

Why raise the turn?

See, that's the problem with this forum. A lot of snappy advice, mostly parroted from what better posters have said before, not enough thinking about or explaining why one should make certain plays.

I'm not saying it is wrong to raise the turn. If I was 100% sure I played this hand to perfection, I wouldn't be posting it.

RED_RAIN · #7 06-29-2004, 02:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you are that dense, so you must be being contrary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm, I was joking. I don't get what your idea of the meaning pretty cards. Does this mean Ax, Kx, Qx, does it mean any 2 random, does it mean any 2 face? Sorry I can't read your mind.

[ QUOTE ]
I was sure I was ahead of UTG on the turn. He had two chances to show me otherwise. Even though he was passive, he would have raised with a K. He could have Qx but I already have one and I am pretty sure BB has another. Not likely all four Q are in play.

Why raise the turn?

See, that's the problem with this forum. A lot of snappy advice, mostly parroted from what better posters have said before, not enough thinking about or explaining why one should make certain plays.

I'm not saying it is wrong to raise the turn. If I was 100% sure I played this hand to perfection, I wouldn't be posting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would not be surpised if UTG if passive had like K and a low kicker and was afriad of losing to a better kicker. The reason I'd raise on the turn, if I felt like I was in front, I would rather get money in on the turn, this would also help show me if they 3 bet me to put them on a hand, and if not, to make more money if they call a bet on the river where I have them beat. That's the reason.

Strange how you get all pissed off about replies to your post when you are the one asking for help. If you want it explained to you more indepth say it, don't be rude, or perhaps later on you won't get help. If you know some reasons are wrong, state them, so we know what you are thinking.

cartoonsoldier · #8 06-29-2004, 01:29 AM

He might have hit his straight with TJ?

Sent · #9 06-29-2004, 01:31 AM

Hmm interesting hand

-Sent

MortalNuts · #10 06-29-2004, 02:09 PM

I think this is actually an interesting hand. A lot comes down to exactly how aggressive your opponents are, but I think your line is fine versus some people.

You're not folding the flop against this player with that pot.

You're not folding the turn, either, and raising would make the pot so big that against a LAG you probably still have to call down if you're 3-bet.

Also, there really aren't many hands that are behind you that you'd really be happy to fold out (that might actually fold) -- any pair lower than Qs is drawing to two outs; plus if you're behind to a K you're drawing dead on the turn, if behind to QJ or AQ you're drawing to 7 or 3 outs for the chop, if behind to AA you're drawing to 2 outs, etc., etc.

All these things -- the possibility that you may be way ahead or way behind, versus an aggressive opponent -- make me lean towards calling down. Yet if this opponent is truly LAGish, you may have too much of a hand not to try putting in a raise somewhere.

Finally, I think it's very tough for your opponent to 3-bet you when you raise the river (as opposed to the turn), with that board, with any hand that you're ahead of. This suggests that if you ARE going to put in a raise somewhere, the river might be the place to do it.

So yeah, I think your line is definitely defensible. I'm assuming, btw, that your opponent is aggressive enough that he would play this way not just with a worse Q, but also like 99-JJ -- if he won't, I'm not as convinced you want to raise the river.

Things that would make me more likely to take this line: an opponent who might actually fold an underpair (which is drawing thin) to a turn or flop raise, and/or will call my river raise reliably with worse hands. Things that would make me less likely to take this line: an opponent who will ever 3-bet the river here with a hand worse than mine. This is all pretty obvious, I guess, but it's worth stating.

anyway, nice hand.

just my 2c.

cheers,

mn