KK unimproved against LAGs, do you bet this river

stlip · #1 04-07-2005, 07:40 AM

Table is a classic w/ 5 crazies or borderline crazies, 3 rocks and little ol' me. I'm just playing with the wild bunch in this hand.

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Littleol'me is UTG+2 with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
2 folds, Littleol'me raises, MP1 calls, 1 fold, MP3 calls, CO 3-bets, 3 folds, Littleol'me caps, MP1 calls, MP3 calls, CO calls.

Flop: (17.50 SB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (4 players)
Littleol'me bets, MP1 calls, MP3 calls, CO calls.

Turn: (10.75 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (4 players)
Littleol'me bets, MP1 calls, MP3 calls, CO folds.

River: (13.75 BB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (3 players)
Littleol'me ???

itsmesteve · #2 04-07-2005, 07:51 AM

If the two players left are the maniacs, I might try to check call this river if i'm confident its getting bet. However, if a bet folds a couple of small [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]s then betting is the way to go. IF one of the players is a rock, he's not calling without a decent flush, I dont think. I'd like to know who the players are that are left, b/c its a situation where it really depends on the players. You want to bet if you'll be called by worse hands or ck/call if they'll bluff w/ hands you beat.

@bsolute_luck · #3 04-07-2005, 08:05 AM

check/call. the pot is too big too fold and i doubt betting out is going to help since they've held on this far, so noone is folding and you've lost to any useless [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] out there.

KaiShin · #4 04-07-2005, 10:51 AM

I'd bet/fold in this situation.

You're first to act, so if you check you're conceding that you don't have a diamond, so how can you possibly call a bet when someone else represents one? You aren't taking down this pot against two opponents by check/calling. The correct play is to bet it yourself, and fold to a raise.

Hellmouth · #5 04-07-2005, 10:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd bet/fold in this situation.

You're first to act, so if you check you're conceding that you don't have a diamond, so how can you possibly call a bet when someone else represents one? You aren't taking down this pot against two opponents by check/calling. The correct play is to bet it yourself, and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that this is the correct line as well. The lack of raising with the third diamond on the board signals either no one has two diamonds in their hand or they have very low diamonds. By betting you could possibly drive out anyone with a weak flush thinking that they may be beaten by a higher diamond. (although not likely with LAG's) If you check call you risk losing the pot at showdown to a small diamond. The bet might save you the pot.

Greg

stlip · #6 04-07-2005, 11:02 AM

I hate the bet fold line. (Is it just me?)

I can be assured (mostly) of at least seeing the showdown for one bet by check calling.

No one at this table would fold a diamond to a single bet.

Checking could even induce a bluff or a bet from a weaker pair from these players.

KaiShin · #7 04-07-2005, 11:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I hate the bet fold line. (Is it just me?)

I can be assured (mostly) of at least seeing the showdown for one bet by check calling.

No one at this table would fold a diamond to a single bet.

Checking could even induce a bluff or a bet from a weaker pair from these players.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well you had characterized your opponents as LAG, but they sure don't look very aggro in this hand. If that's your read then by all means go with it, but the lack of aggression in this case tells me I should lead this river, not induce a bluff.

Bradyams · #8 04-07-2005, 11:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I hate the bet fold line. (Is it just me?)

I can be assured (mostly) of at least seeing the showdown for one bet by check calling.

No one at this table would fold a diamond to a single bet.

Checking could even induce a bluff or a bet from a weaker pair from these players.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may be just me, but I don't want to induce a bluff on the river, cause I'll most likely fold to it.

Here's why you bet. You've been the aggressor the whole hand and saying you have a strong hand. If you bet you'll probably only get raised by the K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], and possibly the Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. Then you know you're beat and you can lay it down.

Also by betting you can possibly force out any small [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], and win the pot without one.

If only get callers you get a showdown the same way you would by check-calling.

The bet-fold line is the only way to go with the river IMO.

droolie · #9 04-07-2005, 12:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Also by betting you can possibly force out any small [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], and win the pot without one.

If only get callers you get a showdown the same way you would by check-calling.

The bet-fold line is the only way to go with the river IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many times in a thousand do you think a small diamond folds to a river bet? I think you could count it on your fingers and toes.

tiltaholic · #10 04-07-2005, 11:18 AM

are the MPs maniacs or ricks?
they don't look like maniacs?

if they are rocks, i bet the river and fold to a raise.
rocks have a much higher likelyhood of folding a small diamond here.
if they are true maniacs, i can see them bluff raising the river, and i think betting the river and calling a raise might be the way to go. however, few people but the truly insane have the heuvos to bluff raise multiple people...so check-calling might be better in this big pot.

i am always unsure when it's not headsup, where bet-folding is clearly the way to go.