Sklansky on Poker problem - the other side

[astroglide]

weak/tight, tight/passive, and tight/aggressive are extremely different things and none of those were defined.

"Perhaps I should have also mentioned that he wasn't a moron."

so it takes a moron to not have a full house on this board? i'd really like an answer to that question.

i'll agree that there is value to be found in analyzing anything, but i think hands against average players are the most important, because they represent the majority of the opponents we play. unless somebody says something specific, average is assumed.

one cannot infer from your post that you dislike writing about heads-up play with average players.

i mean and meant no offense. clarifying this kind of stuff in the future will only make your responses more insightful.

[DanZ]

I did say that the player was pretty tight. That is really all I know about the player - honest. Most players who play pretty tight in the games I play also have some skill. I can't say how much, of course, hence the river call.

There are other hands he could have that beat a big pair -
AK, QK, and KJs, and 97s. I only beat 1 of these, and tie 3 of them. THis hardly justifies a call on the end from the pot odds. So, like I said, unless he has misread the situation (that I would check a big pair on the turn and call a bet with it), I am in deep trouble, hence my hesitant call on the river.

Of course, if he was really on my line, he would check-raise the river. So he may have entertained that I had a big ace or medicore pair, or just bet because I checked and he didn't think that I would bet a big pair if he checked, but would not have called with ace high.

Since I was not sure that he knew that, and he might think I'd pay HIM off with AQ or such, then I had a call.

[astroglide]

were you actually considering a fold on the river?

[J_V]

The play IS terrible. There are some pros to the play, so it's not idiotic, but it's certainly not good. I would never play the hand this way. The best reason for betting the turn is that second king is one of the best cards for someone holding a medium pocket pair to see (for obvious reasons). If I called the flop here you'd likely see me at the river.

[amtannn]

Why would checking the turn be a good idea? I just cant figure that out. In this case, it would have cost our guy his bet (and probably a re-raise) but in general there is no way to know that the other player has trips with a pocket pair. What if the guy had a smaller pair, or some type of draw? You're basically giving away a free card even though you have 3 kings. Are you suggesting that he slow play the 3 kings for fear the other player would fold? Please explain.

[Ed Miller]

The idea is to induce a bluff on the river and to vary your play and confuse your opponents. It is not likely that your opponent will like his hand much when the King pairs on the turn (and you were an UTG preflop raiser) unless he has the case King or he has a set (and therefore has you beaten). So most likely, he will just fold to your turn bet. If you check behind on the turn, though, your opponent may begin to suspect that you have a hand like AQ and try to take the pot from you on the river with a bet.

The pot is relatively big, so you do have to worry about giving a free card. The specific scenario that you have to worry about is giving a free card to a hand that would not have called your turn bet, but has outs to beat you. That is basically a small pocket pair... so your opponent has 2 outs in that case. You have to compare the pot size to the likelyhood that your opponent does have a small pocket pair and the chance that he will beat you on the river. That is the pot equity that you are giving away when you check behind. You then compare that to the chance that you will make a bet (or two) on the river that you would have not made otherwise. If the latter is greater than the former, then you should consider the play.

The reason I suggest raising the river instead of just calling is that his opponent's bet on the end could easily be not just a bluff... but a value bet of a hand that you can beat. It could be the case King or a smaller pair... and he may pay off your raise because he suspects that you are putting on a play with AQ.

This play breaks down completely when the King doesn't pair on the turn. First, many hands have more than 2 outs against him now, and the pot is relatively big. Second, his opponent won't be as worried that he is hopelessly behind, so he may mistakenly call a turn bet that he should not call. If the pot were smaller, though, then it might again be correct to check behind.

[amtannn]

*

[PokerPrince]

Like another poster said, seeing that second King come on the board is great to a player with second pair as it becomes less likely you hold one. This alone makes betting the turn a ridiculously obvious choice. If in fact you are playing against crafty/observant opponents then checking the turn and raising the river might be a viable plan to throw the opposition off. Plays like this should be done sparingly IMO. Not raising the river is ludicrous. I think you left some bets on the table.

PokerPrince

[DanZ]

yes. like I said, if he understood my play, and my check behind said "I would call with a big pair, but not with ace high", then his bet is a real bet for value. And if this is the case, and he doesn't have aces (fairly safe assumption), I am not really getting odds for a call.

This is especially true if he would add some probability to the fact that I might check a king on the turn.

After debating this, I thought "I don't really know this guy, and he might think he's getting a call from an ace, or that I raised with a tiny pair like nines or sevens and will call. So I will call but I don't like it".

So yes, I did. But since all I really knew about the guy was that he was "pretty tight", and presumed he had some skill (since he was "pretty tight"), I made the call.

[astroglide]

getting 6:1 with a k86/k/2 non-flushed board with a king and the second-best kicker, i think even thinking about a fold is absolutely terrible. there are many, many, many, many, many better places to look for ev than making river folds like this.