total unfluffableness

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The river was a diamond and the BB bet out. Profile on this guy is, he got there.

[/ QUOTE ]

"...he got there"

But maybe, just maybe, once in a while he was sort of already there with ace queen and he's virtually certain you have big slick, after all sixes full doesn't make sense, but he is going to chase and hope and why not, the pot is big, three outs to win and six outs to tie and he's watched two kings disappear and now he's even more hopeful and maybe the river will scare that fascinating, charismatic and a tad eccentric/goofy tight-aggressive guy in the catbird seat lay down for one last bet before so why not bet the river and see what happens...

So you bullet folded. He gains if you lay down incorrectly one time in twenty-two. You bullet folded!?!?!

Am I missing something here? I've never bullet folded. And I've never been so confident in a read that I have laid down a big hand for one bet head up when a scare card comes in a pot I couldn't jump over with a trampoline.

Maybe I need to work on this. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Luv,

Rick

[/ QUOTE ]



Perhaps a month ago, probably more like two, I said about the same thing to Tommy in a post where he (correctly) folded a big hand in a big pot to a scare river card. I said it then and he gave me much about the same answer as he gave you. I wasn't crazy about the advice then - but I have realized something in the last few months.

I'm far from the best poker player in the world. I don't even think I'm good. Thankfully, I'm a winning player (in that I have more winning sessions than losing sessions and my winning sessions are more profitable than the losers are costly -- keeping accurate records is fun for the whole family) so I'm able to use poker as a way to throw an extra few bucks into my pocket AND to have fun in an intellectual game with limited parameters yet nearly infinite variations.

I would make that call Tommy made every time (so would you, from the sounds) and it would be right for us in that I'm guessing you are likewise not the player that Tommy is (I certainly know that I am not). I don't trust my reads so when I have a huge hand and I can make that crying call, it's good for me since, even though I'm usually "wrong" by making the call, many times, I'm right to, because my read isn't great and someone is "bluffing" at me with AQ or whatever.

However, Tommy had the read dead-on, so it was fine.

I think for many players, that fold would be incorrect, as if you take 100 situations where that came up, you would be more profitable to call. However, for a guy like Tommy or other good poker players, those 100 situations where you "think" you're beat you're only beat 90 of them -- and you're getting better than that on your money. However, perhaps, those same 90 times when you're actually beat some players will make the fold 91 or 92 times, making it the right decision for them.

Not everything is the same for everyone.

And reading players is an important skill that is often overlooked as unnecessary, when, in fact, it can lead to many saved bets (the other night at Foxwoods, I threw away probably 20 big bets when I thought I was beat -- and every time I called that bad river or that checkraise on the turn and called it down from there ... and I was always wrong to do so).

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

[Poker_pete]

The factor that no one seems to be discussing that I believe is that most important is:

Quote

UTG folded KK face up

If two kings are known to be missing, doesn't that increase the chances that the player bets into you with AQ? 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?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ 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

[mike l.]

"Betting scare cards is part of being a Californian."

i dont have time to be writing this, it's silly that i am.

but the first time i played black chip hold em at commerce early last year i guess it was, i remember a hand where i had KK and had 3 bet preflop and bet and raised all the way and the Ah came at the river putting not only the ugly overcard but a completed flopped flush draw. my lone opponent a pretty and tough playing girl who ive definitely had a losing record against since bet into me and i called and she tapped the table and said "small pair" and i took it down.

at that moment i felt i was finally playing a game where players were more often than not playing hold em in a way i could relate to.