Do I bet this river?

[FoxwoodsFiend]

5/5 blinds NL at Foxwoods. UTG is a tricky aggressive player who has trouble making laydowns. He has about $9k and I have him covered. I have a TAG image and have gotten KK 3 times in the last hour. I get KK on the cut-off with 4 limpers and raise to 50, two callers including UTG. Flop is 2 4 9 rainbow. Two checks to me and I bet 250. UTG smooth-calls which is abnormal (he rarely calls, normally always jamming the pot) so I immediately put him on a flopped set. The turn comes a king and the board is still rainbow. He makes a comment like "I don't think I like that card" and checks. Now I'm sure he has a set and is worried I have KK- I bet $1000 and he calls. The river comes a 4. He checks.
I now have a serious problem with betting the river-since I put him on a set, he could easily have rivered quads here but if he has 99 I can take a decent amount off him. I'm worried about exposing myself to a check-raise here-should i bet this river and if so, how much?

[ML4L]

Hey Foxwoods,

I think this is the best hand I've seen posted in forever. I don't know my "answer" yet, but here is my take. To make betting incorrect, you must make some very strong assumptions about your opponent. But, I really think that those strong assumptions might be met. Not sure yet, though...

Can't wait to see what others think.

ML4L

[theBruiser500]

Seems like an easy bet to me. He could 99, 44 or 22. There are 6 combos of hands you beat and 1 combo of hands you don't beat. He will be glad to get money in with all 7 hands.

[Utah]

I think betting is mandatory. You cant be afraid of the quads here, even if they are possible. His check call on the river could simply be a slowplay especially with no draws on the board. His comment could be a ploy.

I think I would bet pot as he is likely to call. If he comes back over the top, well then it gets ugly. I would probably still end up calling because he could likely reraise with the set as well as quads. It depends how good a player he is.

[BK_]

i bet and probably fold to a raise. there is little chance he would bluff in this situation, and even less he could have a bluffing hand. and since none of the hands you beat would think about c/r the river after that turn card and his comment, i fold to a significant raise.

[aggie]

[ QUOTE ]
i bet and probably fold to a raise. there is little chance he would bluff in this situation, and even less he could have a bluffing hand. and since none of the hands you beat would think about c/r the river after that turn card and his comment, i fold to a significant raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand this line of thinking but disagree. I would definitely bet the river but i would never fold to a raise. As a matter of fact, i would overbet the river to the point where you are pot commited. You might even want to move in (especially against a opponent who has trouble laying down hands). If your opponent has a full house he will probably call. There are rare exceptions against ultra conservative players, but here is why you must not fold here very often:
1. You have the second nuts!
2. YOur opponent might have misread you here and may try to take you off a hand like aces, or AK. Granted, this won't happen often, but it does happen.
3. It is much more likely (statistically) that he has one of the other sets
4. If you are not willing to lose your stack with this hand, it should not be on the table.
5. Opponents will call in this game with other full houses.
6. you have the second nuts!

[greg nice]

um.. stacks are 9k. you dont want to overpet the pot or move in.. that defeats the purpose of a bet because some players WILL fold a fullhouse lesser than yours. if you are betting, you want to be called by worse hands.

[BK_]

you cant just play the strength of your own hand. you have to figure out your opponents range of hands if he check raises the river. in a normal 10/20 game, his range is pretty small, and probably can be limited pretty confidently to 44. whether or not folding to his raise is correct (its at least debateable), the reasons you mentioned for wanting to get all in with these stack sizes are a bit off.

your bet amount should be the maximum amount that other boats will call. there is an upper limit to this amount. i would suspect it is nothing larger than the pot here, and might even be around 2000.

[SlyAK]

Why the heck are stacks sooooooo deep?!? 1800X BB for villain and hero has him covered.

I say bet $2,000 on the river. You said in the original post that villain had trouble folding good hands, so he should easily call that much with a smaller boat.

Sly

[FoxwoodsFiend]

I think most people are missing the point of this point, which is does it make sense to bet a significant amount knowing that if I get check-raised I probably have to muck? I'd say villain will muck even 99 if I overbet the pot as that would be a confirmation of his read that I have KK(a tight player betting 1k and then 2k doesn't indicate AK, but KK). He has trouble making laydowns but he also has a read on me in this hand. Anyway, I would like to see fewer posts about how he will probably call if I bet hard and more about what size bet makes sense given the vulnerability to a check-raise. Clearly there is a trade-off between getting the most I can out of him and not exposing myself to his re-raise if he has quads. So do I bet and how much is still the issue, not "if I have nothing to worry about from villain's hand and he has a sucker house how much can I get out of him?" I think most responses are downplaying the extent to which my hand is vulnerable and can not hold up if significant action occurs. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
P.S. Stacks are so deep because he sat down with 9K and I wanted to have him covered. This was over the summer before Foxwoods got the minimum thousand dollar buy-in table going.