|
|
#11
12-27-2005, 01:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KJo - what do you think of this line?
[ QUOTE ]
You make it sound like getting raised by CO would be a good thing. That would suck. Also, you say we bet so KT dosn't check through, but then you say KT is value raising if we bet. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Also, if CO raises the river I'm never calling. 
|
|
#12
12-27-2005, 01:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJo - what do you think of this line?
[ QUOTE ]
Quote: Off the top of my head, I think that top pair-jack kicker OOP is not what I want to play when it comes back to me 3-bet, and I fold on the flop. I'm sure I would have done this in the heat of the moment. My initial thought was to fold, but then I thought about it and decided to call. [/ QUOTE ] Two things about the flop: 1. MP3 is pretty passive. How often do you think he has a king here? If it's pretty often, it also makes it even less likely that CO has a king and more likely he has a set. 2. Reverse implied odds will kinda suck on this hand because when CO has a set you are stuck calling multiple bets, and even more bets when you hit a king or jack.
|
|
#13
12-27-2005, 01:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJo - what do you think of this line?
I'm going to bed now so I'm posting my last thoughts on this hand.
Given the range of hands I put him on 55/22 and KJ/KT/K9s and a couple of discounted Kxs I think folding this flop would be incorrect. At the river my thought was that CO will probably checking through the river with K9s and also very possible KTo and maybe even KJo. He probably knows I'm a decent player and seeing me calling the flop 3-bet might have scared him. The only hands I'm sure he'll bet is 55/22, so I think I need to bet my own winners to get paid off here. If he raises the river a fold seems safe since he'll have a really hard time finding a raise KJo or worse after this aggression. I'll be checking this thread tomorrow so I'll be glad to get some more input.
|
|
#14
12-27-2005, 01:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJo - what do you think of this line?
[ QUOTE ]
1. MP3 is pretty passive. How often do you think he has a king here? If it's pretty often, it also makes it even less likely that CO has a king and more likely he has a set. [/ QUOTE ] I wouldn't consider 0.9 especially passive having a vpip of 43. And his 8% pfr makes it hard for him to hold a better K. MP3 is a problem though, in more than 1 way. If he caps the flop I will fold the turn. [ QUOTE ] 2. Reverse implied odds will kinda suck on this hand because when CO has a set you are stuck calling multiple bets, and even more bets when you hit a king or jack. [/ QUOTE ] I actually don't think the reversed implied odds suck here as CO will pay me the same ammount when I'm ahead. CO will bet the turn with a K but often take a free sd if I call to the river. The bet at the river is to prevent the reversed implied odds by getting paid when ahead. Also the pot is pretty big making the rio a smaller factor. We have a problem though. When behind we're way behind drawing as good as dead. When we're ahead CO has 3 outs which is not very much, but here's where MP3 becomes a concern again. He's likely to have 3-5 additional outs against me making it 6-8 outs. And since there's no way I'm getting MP3 to fold that will cut pretty big into my equity. Still, of about 13 combos I'm ahead of 5, splitting to 2 and loses to 6. I think that's enough for a call-down. About hitting a K or J, I know that won't improve my hand against CO, but if I hit a K or J I will instead check/call the river since I otherwise would have to call a raise (he might raise KT when he rivers trips) and I'm now also certain he'll bet the river value betting his trips. At the same time I'm all of a sudden ahead of less combos since there's now less combos of KT/K9s/Kxs possible.
|
|
#15
12-27-2005, 03:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJo - what do you think of this line?
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't consider 0.9 especially passive having a vpip of 43. [/ QUOTE ] Did anyone ever do anything about figuring out how much vpip matters? IDK I still think .9 is on the passive side, though defenetely not like a calling station. I'm not really worried about MP3 having a better king, I was just saying it makes it a tiny bit more likely that CO has a set. [ QUOTE ] I actually don't think the reversed implied odds suck here as CO will pay me the same ammount when I'm ahead. [/ QUOTE ] Well I think of reverse implied odds as its own thing. Obviously with the line you took the implied vs. reverse implied odds are pretty equal, but in general as a good player I think we want to have implied odds on the big streets. But yeah, I guess it doesn't suck too much. [ QUOTE ] He's likely to have 3-5 additional outs against me making it 6-8 outs. [/ QUOTE ] So by the river we are getting outdrawn like what, 20% - 25% of the time? Yeah still looks like a call down.
|
|
#16
12-27-2005, 07:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJo - what do you think of this line?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You make it sound like getting raised by CO would be a good thing. That would suck. Also, you say we bet so KT dosn't check through, but then you say KT is value raising if we bet. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. Also, if CO raises the river I'm never calling. [/ QUOTE ] No, I'm not saying it would be a good thing. Just that if MP folds and CO raises it is an easier fold. If MP calls CO might raise a more marginal hand with a bad player caught between. Re-reading it this morning(after some much needed sleep)I realize how hard it would be for CO to raise KT/KJ even KQ would find it hard to raise against another player who isn't a donkaholic. Just make sure CO doesn't view you as such before you bet/fold.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
