Set of Kings (FTP 3/6)

3/6 at Full Tilt. Sorry for no converter, it doesnt support FT.

Hero is SB with KdKh.
MP1 is 20.5/8.09/1.63

Pre-Flop: 2 folds, UTG+2 raises, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, CO folds, Button calls, Hero 3-bets, BB folds, UTG+2 calls, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, Button calls.

Flop: 2h Ks 3s. Hero bets, UTG+1 folds, MP1 raises, MP2 folds, Button calls, Hero 3-bets, MP1 caps, Button folds, Hero calls.

Turn: 3h. Hero bets, MP1 raises, Hero 3-bets, MP1 caps, Hero calls.

River: 2c. Hero bets, MP1 raises, Hero 3-bets, MP1 caps, Hero calls.

UTG+1 shows 2d2s and Hero has to buy a new keyboard because his curreny one is covered in puke.

Anyway I could have put this one down? I felt another set on the flop and the turn and river yelled quads, but I fell in love with my hand.

Edited by W. Deranged to fix flop action (that's the only way it makes sense.)

[W. Deranged]

The only question here is the river.

No one with those stats has a two pair hand here if those stats are close to correct. By the point of the turn, we can probably put our opponent on exactly 22 or 33. It's probably split like 70%/23%/7% between 22/33/weird crap.

Anyway, once you get screwed by the river, I honestly think that we have enough information to check-call the river. It sounds absurd, but there is just so little that villain can have here other than a pur bluff hand or a weird AA that means we need to check the river. If villain is jamming a big draw of some kind checking on the end isn't bad because it lets them bluff as they probably missed on the river and A high is probably at least as likely to bluff the end as it is to pay off.

So, as weird as it sounds, a river check-call is probably correct here. (!!!)


P.S. Only because the river actually ends up being interesting am I not treating this as a bad beat post... which it actually is. It just happens to be a somewhat valid exercise in hand-reading.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

I'm capping here 100/100. Only 1 time so far have I ever put a guy on quads with any real certainty and still didn't fold to his raise. He could have any 2, any 3, AA, etc.

[W. Deranged]

Think about it this way:

1. There is only one K in the deck so that's not that likely.

2. Villain at 1.7 agg. factor is too passive to take the turn to four bet's on a paired board with AA, probably.

3. Villain is not four-betting the flop with just a 2 or just a 3.




Villain is reasonable! 20/8/1.7 is going to be playing pretty straightforwardly. He's not cold-calling raises with lots of weird stuff. He's not taking the flop and turn to four bets with weird stuff.


As I said, on the turn, we take it to 4 bets because our equity even after that much action is probably about 75% or so.

On the river, the worst card has come, and I don't think we're winning even a majority of the time against a rational opponent. We shouldn't even bet, let alone raise, three-bet, or cap this river.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

[ QUOTE ]
Think about it this way:

1. There is only one K in the deck so that's not that likely.

2. Villain at 1.7 agg. factor is too passive to take the turn to four bet's on a paired board with AA, probably.

3. Villain is not four-betting the flop with just a 2 or just a 3.




Villain is reasonable! 20/8/1.7 is going to be playing pretty straightforwardly. He's not cold-calling raises with lots of weird stuff. He's not taking the flop and turn to four bets with weird stuff.


As I said, on the turn, we take it to 4 bets because our equity even after that much action is probably about 75% or so.

On the river, the worst card has come, and I don't think we're winning even a majority of the time against a rational opponent. We shouldn't even bet, let alone raise, three-bet, or cap this river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I'm missing something, but this hand history is completely messed up, so I'm not going to argue either way until it's clarified.

Sorry for the typo, looks like deranged fixed it correctly. Won't let it happen again.

Im just curious as to how many times you cold call an utg raise with 22 or 33 deranged?

[Spook]

pikku, what range do you put the CC villian on? KQs? A3s? 77?

I think that is what W. Deranged is trying to get at with the hand reading. It is not likely, but is it more likely then CC with A3s?

[W. Deranged]

The basic point of this hand is hand-reading.

Knowing that villain is 20/8/1.7 or whatever is VERY powerful. This means that he plays about the right number of hands, raises a reasonable amount, and plays about neutrally post-flop. Those are the type of numbers you see from basically break-even types who know a fair amount about the game but don't play particularly well post-flop in the more challenging situations. These are opponents you are not going to make all that much money off because they don't give that much away, but aren't experts and shouldn't be taking anything from you either.


Let's consider this hand step by step as a hand-reading exercise:

Pre-flop: Villain cold-calls an open-raise from his immediate right in MP1.

A player like this probably plays a few too many hands and isn't good about three-betting hands he probably should. I think his range is reasonably wide here, but not absurd: basically, I think it is going to contain A LOT of pocket pairs (these are very likely cold-calling hands from a player like this), suited broadways type hands (KJs, QJs, etc...), and a couple of decent offsuit big-card hands (AJo, AQo, KQo).

A player with those numbers is not going to be playing hands like 76s here (his VPIP would be MUCH higher if he regularly played small suited connectors for raises), or hands like A3s. He MAY be any any ace type who is more likely to play A3s than QJs, but it's more likely he's not.

So let's say villains range is something like {22+, JTs-KQs, QTs-AQs, AJs, AJo-AQo, KQo} plus something like 30%{AA, AKo, A2s+, 45s+} (meaning we include those hands but discount them to only 30% of a full hand).


Flop: You bet out after three-betting from the blind pre-flop, and villain raises. This is a strong show of strength. We can eliminate all the non-pair hands, and should discount a lot of the medium pair type hands very heavily (I don't see hands like 88 here, for example). After you three-bet and villain caps, I think we can cut the range down to just the sets, big draws, and heavily discounted K hands. Villain is not capping here with A2s or A3s.

So villain's range on the flop is something like {22, 33, AK, KQ, AA, Axs, 45, xx}. Everything but those first two need to be heavily discounted based on both flop and turn action. We throw in xx as there's a small chance he's got something bizarre and is having a psycho moment.

Turn: Villain likes the 3 and continues to put heavy pressure on this hand. By this point I think we can effectively remove AK, KQ, and the draws, because those hands just aren't raising and capping this turn once the board pairs and considering you have not come close to stopping showing strength. AA also needs to be heavily discounted because AA slows down somewhat by this point as well. So villain's range is, voila, {22, 33, AA/xx}.

As I mentioned before the distribution is probably something like {70, 23, 7} or so.



That's enough information for me to check-call this river.

[lozen]

I think someone once said here you havent been playing enough hands until youve had your fullhouse beat by quads. Id bet it to the max.