Calling down with KK when feeling you're beat

[Wright Patterson]

5/10 live, full table, most players seem passive with some very loose raisers.

UTG I open-limp black Kings. A couple of callers, a raise from a loose MP player, another caller, and then BB reraises. I cap. Aside from an occasional loose raise, BB seems mostly passive.

Small flop with two Spades, BB checks, I bet, only MP and BB call. Queen of Spades on turn, BB checks, I bet, MP folds, BB raises, I call.

River is a non-Spade blank. I check-call, expecting the BB to show me anything from a funky two pair to a set of Queens. Knowing what I know about BB, should I have folded here? The pot is hefty, but it's hard to imagine I'm not beat.

[StellarWind]

It's not much fun commenting on a hand when the pot size and board are so vague. You cannot be a winning player until you learn to see the cards as individuals and not merely "small" or "spades".

I cannot imagine folding an overpair in this situation.

[ QUOTE ]
the BB to show me anything from a funky two pair to a set of Queens.

[/ QUOTE ]
So he 3-bet preflop with Qx or check-called the flop with an overpair of queens? That seems like a really flimsy theory for believing you are beat.

He may have a flush. Call the turn to draw for your possible flush and pay one on the river to keep him honest.

At limit poker you have to payoff in situations like this. Otherwise you become the game's sucker, forever doomed to being bluffed off your big pots.

[Wright Patterson]

As it turns out he had QQ.

I appreciate your comments and am sorry you didn't have fun because of what you see as vagueness. I've always felt that many situations can profitably be summed up - sometimes the exact details are vital, sometimes they're not.

But maybe what you're saying is that you want to be able to put yourself in the position of playing through the hand exactly as it occurred, and summing up spoils this?

[tolbiny]

But maybe what you're saying is that you want to be able to put yourself in the position of playing through the hand exactly as it occurred, and summing up spoils this?

Its not so much that it spoils it in this way, but when you post a hand you are unsure about usually you have one or two specific questions in mind. That doesnt mean that you played the rest of the hand perfectly and another poster could pick up on something either simple or subtle that you might have missed. It makes it much easier to see these if you now the whole nature of the hand.

remember that poker is a game of information, the more you have the better you chances of making the proper decisions.

And dont fold KK in the situation as you described it.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Aside from an occasional loose raise, BB seems mostly passive.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is the occasional loose raise usually only preflop? Are his BB raises that loose? Usually a raise from the blinds from a passive player is a very strong hand. Could he be pulling this turn move with AQ? Just how passive is he? So far, he doesn't seem totally passive to only put him on the nuts postflop.

Live, it is possible to make this laydown. Given the info, i'd see the showdown. I wouldn't say it's an auto-call as other factors could lead me to folding on the turn. Id also have to know a little more specifics about the player.

[ QUOTE ]
I check-call, expecting the BB to show me anything from a funky two pair to a set of Queens.

[/ QUOTE ]

If i was thinking along this line, i wouldn't be folding. If he's able to do this with 2 a pair preflop, ie...3 bet that loosely from BB, Ill call to make sure. Then, once i have a more confirmed pattern that he would do this on the turn with no less than 2 pair, i might be able to fold the river. This is also great proof for 'not' folding the turn. You're read, based on this, definitely isn't good enough to fold there.

b

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
But maybe what you're saying is that you want to be able to put yourself in the position of playing through the hand exactly as it occurred, and summing up spoils this?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is definitely a valid point. On average you get more responses if you do a nice job of presenting a hand.

But also we may not agree on what is important. 762r and 742r are both small flops, but they are quite different. The danger of someone flopping two pair is much higher with 762 because someone may have played 76 because they are connectors. 762 also provide the common hand 98 with an open-ended straight draw. With 742 I am more willing to accept that strong play must be a made hand. These considerations may or may not have anything to do with your pocket kings, but let the reviewer decide for himself.

Another problem that you have not caused, but which often starts with vagueness, is sometimes hand posters drop new facts into an ongoing discussion. There is nothing quite like a bunch of posters analyzing a hand in depth only to have the original poster change the cards, e.g. suddenly we learn the "blank" on the turn actually puts three parts of a wheel on the board.

BTW, I have been remiss myself. Let me welcome you to 2+2 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. New posters are always encouraged.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't say it's an auto-call as other factors could lead me to folding on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
The factor that caught my attention is we have second nut flush draw. Remember he said his kings were black. Folding the turn is out of the question.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
The factor that caught my attention is we have second nut flush draw. Remember he said his kings were black. Folding the turn is out of the question.

[/ QUOTE ]

I missed that detail about the black kings. In that case, you're right. However, the same thinking on the turn read is then the same on the river. If you're read is that strong, you can fold the river unimproved, as you're calling solely to improve knowing you're beat.

Note that i also said in regarding his post/read, i'd call.

b

[elindauer]

Call the river. This is not the time to try to save a bet. You need only be occassionally right to justify the expense.

my 2 cents.
Eric