My first $5/$10 post. KK turn protection or flop blunder?

[zephed56]

[ QUOTE ]
I cap the flop. Your equity is huge and this flop is uncoordinated.

If CO is likely to bet the turn, then I go for a turn check-raise having called the flop 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think he is VERY likely to bet the turn if I check to him.

[zephed56]

[ QUOTE ]
Cap the flop for value, and lead the turn, three-bet if raised. If you are playing this hand timidly against the CO because you fear a set, you are too underbankrolled for 5/10.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, I was 80% sure I was ahead, but the 3-bet threw me off. I passed on the flop cap because I thought I could get him to raise my bet again, facing the field with 2 cold. If I cap the flop and the field has to call 2 bets, they are probably getting correct odds. I wanted to fold them out.

I'd have to say this might be a bit of FPS, not scared money.

[tallstack]

[ QUOTE ]
I think your equity in this pot is good enough so that you want money coming into the pot, not folds. If someone sucks out, oh well. Take your Sklansky bucks and play the next hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

This argument is really weak. It is not a question of whether we want more money in the pot or not. It is a question of whether our equity will increase, and whether specific lines will cause it to increase more than others. Putting money into the pot when our pot equity is greater than our share of the contribution is going to result in +EV. However, this doesn't mean it is the correct action if another action will result in a higher +EV. When pots increase in size there is often more than one +EV solution, but we still need to choose the one with the greatest +EV. Inducing people to chase is not going to be as +EV as inducing them to fold when the pot is already large and you have a hand that is vulnerable to multiple opponent draws.

The OP has a line that may very well be the most +EV depending on the actions of the LAG CO. This is in all reasonable likelihood a situation that gets better when people fold, not call. If we could put all the opponents on lower pocket pairs without straight draw potential, then we would want calls, but this is an unrealistic scenario. If they have gutshot draws, open ended draws, or pairs to the board with live kickers, then we definately want them to fold. If they have the odds to call a single bet on the turn then they are taking some of our money in doing so. If we can choose a line that increases the likelihood of folds then we will benefit more than if they call.

[ QUOTE ]
I;m sure by now you see why you must either cap the flop or c/r the field on the turn, not thin it.


[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't see any logic in your post to convince me that we want calls on the turn. I am open to hear this logic, but you have not spelled it out here.

Dave

[WarmonkEd]

I think this is really dependent on OP's read of CO. With the 3bet on the flop and everyone calling, the pot is huge. So you want to protect it, especially against 3 other players. If I was very confident that CO would raise my turn bet, then I think the OP's play was fine. If I wasn't sure he'd raise, but that he'd bet when checked to, then I'd forget about trying to thin the field and go for the turn C/R.

[MAxx]

tall stacks had a really good point, and i like how you bring it all together to lead or c/r depending on read... and if we don't have any LAG read on CO at all... then cap flop.

[StellarWind]

The problem with OP's line is that he is passing up a large amount of immediate equity on the flop to go for a very uncertain benefit on the turn. There is a really good chance that either 1) Cutoff won't raise the turn with a worse hand or 2) he will raise no matter what you do on the flop.

I agree that if you *knew* that Cutoff would oblige you the smoothcall-bet line would be a good one. Just like smoothcall-checkraise would be good if you knew that would work.

But you don't know that. I think it is a common failing to overestimate our ability to predict what a player is going to do on a future street.

BTW, if I really believed that Cutoff was a complete LAG idiot, I would probably cap the flop *and* go for the checkraise.

[tallstack]

I like your train of thought here. It certainly does depend squarely on the CO's tendancy to raise on the turn. On one hand, he would have to be pretty laggy or have a real good hand to do so. On the other hand, he is in the position where a turn raise benefits him as much as us if he has a strong, but vulnerable, hand. It may be a time when his laggy tendancies mesh with correct play. All in all, the worth of the OP's line falls down to this read.

Dave

[7ontheline]

OK, I should be more specific, you're right.

Given the flop action, since he didn't cap, there are 10 BB in pot. If he bets and CO calls, there is no help - no one with any draw is folding. If CO raises as OP is hoping, people are now getting 6.5-1 on their calls. SB is already described as LP - most LPs I play with won't fold in such a huge pot for 2 cold if they have any decent piece of the board. Also, if BB has a J with live kicker, as OP suspects, he will be getting 7.5-1 to call if SB calls and then probably has implied odds to call.

I think that with the pot so bloated, OP is not going to get the folds he wants so he might as well pump the pot and hope his pair holds up. Plus, not every other player may be drawing live, or some of their outs may overlap. I'm sure people better than me can do a better statistical analysis based on likely hand ranges, but this is my rough estimation.

[MAxx]

remember that there is a difference between getting incorrect calls and getting correct calls. you don't really mind a player too much who calls 2 on the turn when he should not.

[tallstack]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with OP's line is that he is passing up a large amount of immediate equity on the flop to go for a very uncertain benefit on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

The line does give up some equity from the flop, but do you really believe that this is large? My estimate, good or bad, is that it gives up about 1SB in equity. Please let me know if you believe that I am way out on this. I would not say that you give up a large amount of equity on the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
There is a really good chance that either 1) Cutoff won't raise the turn with a worse hand or 2) he will raise no matter what you do on the flop.


[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly, the merit of the OPs line requires having the blinds call 2BBs cold and the only way to accomplish this is with the CO raising. It is a line that will not work all the time. However, calling the flop 3-bet and leading the turn should have the greatest chance of inducing the CO raise. I do believe that capping the flop and leading the turn will result in less raises from the CO, since you will have raised at every opportunity in the hand so far.

The critical factor still remains how often will the CO raise a turn lead and there is no way of knowing this with any great certainty. For the play to have merit then the CO would likely have to raise at least 1/3 of the time to generate enough folding equity, provided it causes one or more of the blinds to fold where they would have otherwise called. I have never said that this play is absolutely the way to go. I have said, however, that too many were dismissing the importance of inducing folds under these conditions. The OP has suggested the only line that has this thought in mind and I believe there is some merit in considering it here.

The turn C/R line does seem to be the best alternative if we do not believe in the likelihood of the CO raising the turn. It does, however, also produce one of the least likely scenarios to generate any folds on the turn.

Now it just may be that the conclusion is that there is no sufficiently good way to induce folds in this hand, but I think that the discussion should inculde that we considered options to induce folds before we chose a line.

Dave