First time I thought about laying down Kings preflop

Slim Pickens · #1 12-15-2005, 05:02 AM

99 is something like a 61% favorite against a top-35% range. A 61% favorite is good enough for me to take all the way at any stage of the tournament and anyone who suggests otherwise is either a +40% ROI player long-term at that level or they're being an idiot.

If the original raiser is not a super-LAG, no way I'm raising 99, as previously stated.

The other players at the table, in a 33, don't usually know the difference between a 3:1 call and a 1:1 call, so raising the absolute minimum that looks big is plenty to avoid going broke with JJ/AKo against a player behind with KK who (rightly) pushes over your raise.

I only threw 99 out there as an extreme to show that KK holds up against any range of hands I can give to quasi no matter what the read on AAAMAN.

#2 12-15-2005, 05:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
99 is something like a 61% favorite against a top-35% range. A 61% favorite is good enough for me to take all the way at any stage of the tournament and anyone who suggests otherwise is either a +40% ROI player long-term at that level or they're being an idiot.

If the original raiser is not a super-LAG, no way I'm raising 99, as previously stated.

The other players at the table, in a 33, don't usually know the difference between a 3:1 call and a 1:1 call, so raising the absolute minimum that looks big is plenty to avoid going broke with JJ/AKo against a player behind with KK who (rightly) pushes over your raise.

I only threw 99 out there as an extreme to show that KK holds up against any range of hands I can give to quasi no matter what the read on AAAMAN.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you openraise that range if it was folded to you? Because you're still in EP/MP. Sucky position, a lot can happen behind you (like people going all-in with KK). I think it's better to only isolate LAGs when you're in late position, and then it would have to be a real LAG. Am I wrong here?

Slim Pickens · #3 12-15-2005, 01:39 PM

I would not open-raise 99 in level 2 there. In this situation, a player has opened for a typical raise and gotten a smallish reraise from a player we can safely label as "good." Everybody so far seems to want to put the reraiser on a very tight range because of the pot odds he's giving the original raiser and everyone behind him to call. Most of the players at the 33's have little to no understanding of pot odds, and I think a good 33's player knows that and adjusts accordingly. A proper adjustment would be to reraise a range of hands that safely beats the opener's raising range (not saying what that is yet), but not so much as to get stacked by a powerhouse hand.

Of course, this all depends on the read on the open-raiser. If he's raising 35% of the first 15-20 hands, I think it would be correct to reraise whatever range beats the top 35% of hands by a healthy amount. If he's raising 0-5% of the first 15-20 hands, then a reraise would only be appropriate with AA/KK and some percentage of "semi-bluff" AKs, TT-QQ as adanthar said.

Now back to Scuba with KK. Certainly, if he thinks quasi is trying to isolate a LAG with a wider range than would normally be smart against a tighter player, he should play his KK without hesitation. I used 99+ as the very widest range I thought quasi could possibly be playing here in the extreme example that AAAMAN was a super-LAG and quasi was feeling bold. The other extreme is AA/KK/??, and I think the ?? happens enough of the time to still not be able to fold KK here, although it's probably close.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's better to only isolate LAGs when you're in late position, and then it would have to be a real LAG. Am I wrong here?

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, later position would be better and he would have to be a really fat LAG. I'm not saying I'd make an isolation move this daring, but I'm not #4 on the leaderboard, so shows what I know.

ferb · #4 12-15-2005, 01:49 PM

Keep in mind that Quasi likely has 10 tables going. I've played 15 tourneys with him and in the early levels he is a 6/4 vp/pfr. I kinda doubt he has to much of a read on original raiser. I have to go with scuba here that his bet can only be AA/KK.

Scuba Chuck · #5 12-15-2005, 02:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that Quasi likely has 10 tables going. I've played 15 tourneys with him and in the early levels he is a 6/4 vp/pfr. I kinda doubt he has to much of a read on original raiser. I have to go with scuba here that his bet can only be AA/KK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I've got over 1200 hands played with him, and your stats reflect my "feel" for him. BTW, I'm guessing quasi is a 2er....

ferb · #6 12-15-2005, 02:35 PM

Do we get to know the result?

Scuba Chuck · #7 12-15-2005, 04:03 PM

I pushed, because it is standard for me. The hand actually gets worse from there. 500ish stack behinid me insta-calls, and utg thinks forever, and says I'm laying down QQ. Quasi calls with his bullets, and he has no worries because the 500-ish stack also has kings.

Slim Pickens · #8 12-15-2005, 05:50 PM

Wow, 6/4 is tight even for a 10-tabler. It probably means he's not making a lot of fancy plays early on... Still, this seems like the extreme case (no read on the raiser, super-tight reraiser) and I still can't convince myself the pure AA read is correct enough of the time to make me lay down KK preflop in an 800-chip Party SNG.

curtains · #9 12-15-2005, 06:45 PM

Ship it! I thought that you posted this because you ended up calling and he didnt have AA, and were going to give a lecture on how to always call! Despite that I stood by my guns and said I'd fold and was correct. Some people telegraph AA so badly that if they ever do when Im at the table, I will fold KK, and there is really no way they can use this information to specifically take advantage of me.

For the most part I can predict when someone has AA-KK for sure with a very high accuracy. What I mean is that when Im super confident that a player has it, Im usually correct. This always has to be a player that I know is solid/good, because random players do crazy min raises with 65s.

gumpzilla · #10 12-16-2005, 07:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Ship it! I thought that you posted this because you ended up calling and he didnt have AA, and were going to give a lecture on how to always call! Despite that I stood by my guns and said I'd fold and was correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Stood by my guns"?

[ QUOTE ]

If you know that hes a very good/tight player, folding probably isnt that bad. In fact based on what you said it may even be correct, but Id really have to know the player myself to make such a statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to be hedging your bets here. You said there were situations where you could fold it, but were pretty inconclusive.

I don't understand the mentality of "Well, I really think this is almost always KK/AA, but as a matter of principle I don't fold KK on level 2" that a couple of people seem to be presenting in this thread. If you're pretty confident it really is going to be KK/AA - and it sounds like there's enough evidence about this player that this is reasonable - folding KK here isn't going to be a huge mistake if it is a mistake at all. It's also not like we're giving up any kind of metagame silliness, because we're neither showing it nor have we made any preflop action.