Re: total unfluffableness
[ QUOTE ]
The factor that no one seems to be discussing that I believe is that most important is - "UTG folded KK face up"
[/ QUOTE ]
In my first post in the thread I imagined a hypothetical opponent becoming encouraged when the kings went into the muck.
[ QUOTE ]
If two kings are known to be missing, doesn't that increase the chances that the player bets into you with AQ?
[/ QUOTE ]
IMO, yes.
[ QUOTE ]
Do you feel there is less than a five percent chance that he was thinking he was outkicked all the way until he sees two kings hit the muck?
[/ QUOTE ]
If he had AQ he thought he was outkicked. However, with Tommy raising and betting every street he still probably thinks he is outkicked but two kings disapearing might make him braver. So I still think the chances he is betting a worse hand are in the five to ten percent range, especially given the chance that Tommy has the flush is extremely small (making the river scary for Tommy but not for him). Betting scare cards is part of being a Californian.
But I wasn't there and Tommy has indicated he had an extremely strong, reliable profile on this player having the flush. I just wouldn't recommend that the typical player make the laydown, given that you need to be so damn sure with the pot this big.
~ Rick
|