Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
KQ?, KJ?, KTs, K9s, QJs, JTs, T9s, QTs

You ought not pull out the only hands that make your argument for your case.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not exactly sure what OP means by "villian is on the tightish side" but tightish players don't limp UTG with stuff like K9, T9, and QT. They do limp with KJ and often they limp with KQ, especially offsuited.

[/ QUOTE ]

please note the suitedness of my post. You don't limp QTs, QJs, T9s? I don't limp K9s or KTs but it is not inconcievable.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If I am villain and I have KQ or KJ, I am calling the turn with my overcards and gut-shot, getting 4:1 on 10 outs.

Since I expected that these 10 outs are clean, I'm going to raise the river when I hit. Given W's flop c/r, I put him on a T or 7, and no way do I expect that his kicker kills my outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look... I don't see KJ, KQ as limping hands UTG. I may very well be wrong. KTs, K9s, seem more probable to me.

Probable limping hands that could play thru the turn as villain played include

KQ?, KJ?, KTs, K9s, QJs, JTs, T9s, QTs

You ought not pull out the only hands that make your argument for your case. KQ and KJ are the least likely, IMHO, hands for villain, though they are possible.

Again, my math sucks.. I mean sucks. But my gut tells me that we are behind to the likely range of hands that villain may have.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't putting him on these hands. I was talking through a possible scenario. You said that his river raise indicates that he can beat two pair. I was giving an example where it might not.

I limp with KQ UTG from time to time. I also limp with KJs.

I agree that KQ and KJ are not the most likely candidates. But I don't think they are less likely than KTs or K9s. And they certainly aren't improbable enough to warrant a fold.

You seem to want to keep arguing with me just for the sake of arguing, because I basically just said the same thing as TakeMeToTheRiver and that seemed ok to you. So I'm done here.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
QJ is very likely here.

[/ QUOTE ]

K8 suit (2) and KJ (8) are more likely than QJs (4). He could have K9s (2) & KT (6) for a better 2-pr, though the action on earlier streets I think discounts these possibilities.

I would 3-bet expecting to see KJ.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet? (With Results)
 

Hey guys,

These are some great responses. I'm surprised this hand has generated this much discussion.

I'd like to hear more about the flop check-raise. I think I check-raise weak hands on the flop in heads-up and short-handed pots WAY too often. I don't worry about the flop checking through, because that happens only very rarely, but I wonder if the pot distortion and "pot commitment" effects in relation to my opponent are more valid concerns than I wonder about. One reason I like a flop check-raise here is that I feel much more comfortable proceeding with the information I gain from a flop check-raise than I do from just leading out, as villain will raise a flop lead with tons of holdings but will likely only three-bet a flop check-raise with stronger holdings. This may not be as valuable as I seem to think it is, though.

As for the results, all you need to know is:

The river got capt = I'm fuct

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet? (With Results)
 

[ QUOTE ]
The river got capt = I'm fuct

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on -- tell us he had KTo and not QJ... it makes the story soooo much better.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

i idin't read the otehr responses.

i never 3bet this, unless i can fold to the cap. if there was a cap at 3 bets, then you should bet this every time, because the odds of you being ahead are above 50%. but because you're calling his cap, you need to be ahead more then 2/3rd of the time here to win. (because you're getting 1 more when you're ahead, costing yourself 2 when you're behind ).


btw, from what i saw at tstone you played good. much better then i did before i moved away from 3/6fh. if you have the patience/ time/ bankroll i'd recommend moving to 3/6sh -> 5/10sh etc.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
because you're calling his cap, you need to be ahead more then 2/3rd of the time here to win. (because you're getting 1 more when you're ahead, costing yourself 2 when you're behind ).

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this that hard of a fold post-cap? Pot would be giving 13.25-1. However, OP's read puts opp. on the tight side. Certainly precludes a pure bluff, and almost certainly means opp. is not capping the river with top pair. His position means K's and 3's are impossible.

So I see it as risking just one bet on the river.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
because you're calling his cap, you need to be ahead more then 2/3rd of the time here to win. (because you're getting 1 more when you're ahead, costing yourself 2 when you're behind ).

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this that hard of a fold post-cap? Pot would be giving 13.25-1. However, OP's read puts opp. on the tight side. Certainly precludes a pure bluff, and almost certainly means opp. is not capping the river with top pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

In Will's (OP's) own words:
[ QUOTE ]
Villain seems on the tightish side but I don't have much of a read as I just sat down.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is far from a confident read -- and early reads are generally based primarily on pre-flop play. Based on this limited read, how are you going to be 93% sure that this opponent would not play KQ/KJ this way or that he is above 3-betting with even worse? Hell, there are opponents that play AK ("It's a drawing hand") this way. My gut would tell me that I was losing, but the crying call of the 3-bet is going to happen nearly every time.