OK, help me to not suck

[Nottom]

Paradise 2/4 - don't remember the exact details so bare with me

I get KQo in LMP

2 limpers to me and I limp behind a couple more lipers and/or blinds. 5ish to the flop.

Flop: 9TK (suits don't matter)
First limper bets, next calls, I raise, all fold to better who 3-bets, next folds, i call.

Turn and river are blanks and I call him down.

Does this play seem right?
I was pretty sure I was beat on the flop, but didn't know to what. I was new to the table and wasn't sure how aggressive he might be here with something like KJ or maybe another KQ and figured there was a good enuf chance he had 1 of those along with whatever outs I had ... not that I knew which were good... to call him down here. Help!

[Homer]

I would have capped the flop. If you are bet into again on the turn, call, then fold to a bet on the river unless you improve. If you are checked to on the turn, check behind and call if bet into on the river (or bet if checked to). Some might say that you should follow up your cap with a bet on the turn (and check behind on the river), but then you leave yourself open to a checkraise, and I'm not sure that you can fold when this happens. I'm thinking that you should check behind with outs. An additional benefit to this is that you may induce a bluff on the river from a hand like JT or QT.

Capping the flop is preferable to calling the three-bet with the intention of calling down, because you gain a lot of information for an extra small bet and thus can get away from the hand more cheaply, since you can fold on the river when you don't improve.

-- Homer

[Bob T.]

I think I like this play better than my idea. It costs 1 and a half big bets to see the river, and gives you a reasonable chance to catch a jack.

[Nottom]

Thanks for the advice Homer ... I was pretty sure what he had based on general online tendancies. Most online players would never think about 3-betting a set or god forbid the nuts on the flop so I was pretty sure I was looking at 2-pair, probably KT or 9T (turned out to be K9o ... who'd have thunk it) So a cap on the flop may very well have bought me a free turn card with him fearing the straight.

Ah well, guess I cost myself $2 ... time to go winning it back.

[Schmed]

When I first read it I thought that capping the flop was the way to go. Especially with his position. I would think that if he were bet in to that his opponent would have K9 or maybe even trips. If the guy comes out betting you know you're probably drawing to 3 outs at best.

[NutNoPair]

In this situation I want the following things.

1)I want to see a showdown
2)I want worse hands to continue betting
3)I want better hands to make as little as possible

I would have check-called it down also. There are a variety of hands that you can beat, that he can continue to bet. Making tough lay downs on the river, especially in a multi-way low limit game, is no way to make money. I think planning to do this is a bad habit.

Checking and calling isn't always wrong.

[Homer]

1) I want to see a showdown

Why? If you are *sure* you are beaten then folding to a bet on the river is correct. I can see it being important to get to showdown when against a tricky opponent, but against most opponents, if you cap the flop and you opponent continues betting on the turn and river, you can safely fold to the river bet, assuming you have not improved.

Note - When I say sure I mean that your chances of winning (obviously you must approximate this) are less than the pot odds being offered.

2) I want worse hands to continue betting

This argument has some merit, since we are heads-up with position, with a hand that has good showdown value.

However, there aren't many worse hands that an opponent will be betting with after three-betting you on the flop from out of position.

3) I want better hands to make as little as possible

My suggested play causes a better hand to make less money.

Pretend you are the opponent and have KT or K9. You bet the flop and three-bet a late position player (Hero). If he caps, what will you do on the turn and river? You might bet out on the turn and if he calls the turn bet, there is a good chance you will check the river and let Hero check it through. Even if you bet the river, Hero will fold based on the information he gained from capping (he capped and you still bet out on the turn). You may also check the turn, in which case Hero will check it through and call a bet from you on the river. Thus, if Hero caps, he is putting exactly 2 big bets in the pot (1 to cap flop plus 1 on either turn or river) regardless of your actions from that point on. If Hero does not cap the flop, you will surely bet the turn and river, and he will put a total of 2.5 additional big bets in the pot.

So, better hands will make less if Hero caps the flop. Also, Hero will make more money this way if he makes a straight on the turn.

Note that this is meaningless if you absolutely must see a showdown (and again, I'm not sure why you must).


Any feedback is appreciated...

-- Homer

[NutNoPair]

Just how *sure* are you.

Getting to the river in this hand will cost you 1 extra small bet.

Pre-flop there are five+ small bets in the pot. Actually, there was more, but lets talk about the situation as it was originally posted.

On the turn, an additional seven small bets bring the total to over twelve.

On the turn, you are up to sixteen.

On the river we have eighteen.

So sure, if you can make a 90%+ read on a player who you know nothing about, more power to you. I’ll spend the extra small-bet in case he’s pushing KJ, AQ, 78, 9J, or the other possible draws.

Raising for information rarely yields information worth the price you are paying. Folding on the river to justify a raise on the flop is ludicrous. If I knew the opponent, and the opponent knew me, than I think the raise might have some free card value.

I’m not saying this is how the hand should be played, I’m just saying if I had to choose between the two I would have played it as the poster did.

[Homer]

Just how *sure* are you.

I would be very confident in folding if I capped the flop and my opponent still bet into me on the turn and river.

Getting to the river in this hand will cost you 1 extra small bet.

How do you figure? If you intend to call on the river regardless of the action to that point, then yes, otherwise no.

Folding on the river to justify a raise on the flop is ludicrous.

It sure is. I wouldn't fold on the river to justify the flop raise. I would fold on the river because of the information gained from the flop raise (cap).

I'm not sure why you think I would fold on the river to justify a flop raise. If you think I play with such ass backwards logic, you obviously don't know anything about me.


I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

-- Homer

[34TheTruth34]

I have to agree with Homer on this. When you cap the flop, and he bets into you on the turn and river after blanks come, against a typical opponent your KQ is no good here. That's why you reraise the flop bet. There is no need to see a showdown if you know you are behind. Good players don't call the river just to see what hand beat them. Who cares if it's AA, KK, TT, 99, AK, KT, K9, or QJ???

Against a real tricky player, I prefer the way the poster played the hand, just calling it down, but those opponents are few and far between at these levels.