Re: Do I bet this river?
 

AJ, thats easy money. Maybe YOU can blow him off second nuts in an insane pot too. Not only second nuts but Kings full.

Re: Do I bet this river?
 

I don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet, but if you put him on a set to begin with, Bayes' theorem indicates that he has a 1/7 chance of having quads now. Even with any game-theoretic bluff-raising advantage he might have, you're in the driver's seat here, especially since he's:

a) More likely to call preflop with 99 or 44

or

b) Not more likely to call pretlop with 99 and 44, in which case 22 is just as likely.

Bet a couple thousand dollars already.

Re: Do I bet this river?
 

Hi FF,

This is a great post and thread, despite the insane number of people who haven't read the replies, and keep mentioning that it's 6 to 1 against him having quads.

Several compelling reasons to bet at least $2000 have been mentioned, but I can think of two that I don't remember seeing.

1) Why does he check the river, if he has quads, and things are so transparent to both of you? He knows that you'll gladly put in 1000-3000 on the river, but don't want to put more in. Why not bet 3000, and know that you'll call, with the outside hope that the bet will confuse you into raising? If I was really in this exact spot with quads (complete with "total transparency"), I'd bet the river every time.

2)He played any set badly on the turn, if he strongly suspected KKK. If I had 999 on the turn and was prepared to lay it down (which I would be--ML4L's analysis is right on), I'd raise to 2500 or so, knowing that you wouldn't call unless you had a set (and given your TAG image and my 999, that means a set of Kings). Then, I could be done with the hand, guilt-free, on the river.

This analysis gives both of you a ton of credit, which is how much credit you give yourself and your opponent. It is a hair too much, IMO (not that I know either of you from personal experience). Most people have given you the appropriate amount of credit (IMO), noting that nobody really ever tries to bluff out KK on a board of 2 4 9 K 4, because almost nobody has the, um, "psychological strength," to fold Kings Full here. I'm not saying that you can fold to a raise, since nobody would bluff. I think many excellent players would not be able to resist raising with Nines Full.

Re: Do I bet this river?
 

I agree with Cero_Z. Also something that goes along with what you're saying I think is, foxowdfriends opponent here checked the river with the intention of calling, not folding. If he was thinking of folding he probably would have made a blocking bet on the river.

Just Curious
 

Given all the action both before and during this hand up until the K hits the turn, what would you do in this situation if you were holding AA, instead of KK. Just seems to me that if you are that concerned about not getting paid off with KK here, you should at least be entertaining the idea of betting the turn, and coming strong on the river as a bluff.

I'm not saying a bluff would be the correct play, just that it would have to be entertained, and that the thought process would be interesting.

Re: Just Curious
 

How can you be playing at these high stakes if you cannot except the variance. You simply have to pay him off if he has quads. From what you tell us of his table image he will not fold his lower fullhouse. Who could???

Re: Do I bet this river?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why the heck are stacks sooooooo deep?!? 1800X BB for villain and hero has him covered.

[/ QUOTE ]

5/5 NL Live games with stacks of 10k are quite common.

Re: Do I bet this river?
 

Hi Fox,

I don't comment very much on NL/PL hands because often times the situations are very unique and a lot of hands posted here have too many variables unaccounted for.

With two deep stacks involved, the turn and river play is extremely important via the set-over-set encounter.

ML4L has hit nearly everything I wanted to say, but I there's a flaw in both of your thinking.

It is obvious UTG has as a set. You know that based his play so far. What isn't obvious is that he doesn't know you have KK. You think that he thinks you have KK. If I were UTG (and given that he is a good player), I would put you on 50/50 AK or KK. Simply put, if I even think you have KK 70 percent of the time in this situation, I will fold my flopped set.

Your bet on the turn was perfect to lure him in. His biggest mistake was just calling the turn. No good player here is just going to call the turn with a flopped set, deep stacks and a scared King comes on the turn. His mistake here is not check-raising $2000 to see where he stands. Do you think that he thinks you are the type of player who will play AK in this fashion too? The key here is what do you think he thinks? And what would you do if you were him and had his 99's and knew that an opponent might have spiked AK or KK. This is extremely important and I think you left this part out of your thought process. Is he a good enough player to really put you on KK, and if he does, why in the world would he call the turn?

Barring all math, pot odds aside and basing it solely on play, reads thus far, you have a clear river bet. If he continues to put you on AK/KK, he's going to call no matter what. Now what happens if he does check-raise you on the river given you bet say ..oh half the pot at around $1500.

Given that he probably puts you on AK/KK 50/50 here, a call is a must.

Lawrence

Re: results
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does anybody like this ridiculous underbet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is ridiculous, but understandable. As El Diablo will attest, I have even made huge overplays (or in this case underplay) given the heat of the action.

Bet half the pot next time. He's committed no matter what.

Lawrence

Re: My Take
 

ML4L,

As usual you analsys is sooopppuuurrrbbb... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]