KK in trouble ... or not?

McMelchior · #1 08-20-2005, 10:32 PM

Button is a total flake, who's gotten lucky moving in and hitting very few outs time and again.

The BB joined the table one orbit ago, and has only been involved in one hand so far where he saw & slightly over-bet the flop on the BB, got called in two spots and check/folded the inconsequential turn to a big bet and a call after him - the current button was involved and very poor hands were shown down.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t200 (9 handed) converter

Button (t5440)
SB (t1235)
BB (t9109)
UTG (t8130)
UTG+1 (t4330)
MP1 (t6695)
Hero (t8240)
MP3 (t3670)
CO (t12933)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
3 folds, Hero raises to t600, 1 fold, CO calls t600, Button calls t600, 1 fold, BB calls t400.

Flop: (t2500) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (4 players)
BB checks, Hero bets t1400, CO folds, Button calls t1400, BB raises to t4200, Hero ???

I'm not the least concerned about the button, but what is the BB doing? I pretty much discard QQ (since he would have re-raised PF with 3 other players already in the pot) ... in his position I would probably just flat call the flop with 99 or 77, waiting until the turn to put the heat on. Of course he could be on an open-ender with JT, or value-raising AQ, KQ ...

The pot is very big by now ... what's my move?

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

redrooski24 · #2 08-20-2005, 10:44 PM

Shove it in.

McMelchior · #3 08-20-2005, 11:05 PM

Thank you for your (very enlightening) oppinion.

I take it you think I'm ahead?

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

redrooski24 · #4 08-20-2005, 11:16 PM

Sorry for my great in depth commentary, but now I have some time. We both agree that QQ is out of the picture, and I'm going to assume he won't play 79 or Q9 for a raise since you said he was pretty tight. Yes, he could have 77 or 99 but this mentality is just too weak-tight for me. I think you're looking at KQ or AQ, possibly TJ. I say jam it in on the flop because just calling can bring a nightmare for you on the turn if a Q, A, 8, or even a K falls off. I just can't see him making such a huge check raise with a set on a relatively dry board. Hope that helps.

McMelchior · #5 08-20-2005, 11:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[..] he could have 77 or 99 but this mentality is just too weak-tight for me

[/ QUOTE ]
Since when has being weak/tight been a problem?? If I fold here I still have an average stack, blinds are relatively low, and with my skill-advantage (it's a $10 buy-in) I'm still in great shape.

My point is we have to consider 99 and 77 as a part of villain's possible range of hands.

I ran pokerstove on a possible holding of AQ, KQ, 99 & 77, and interesting enough I'm a big favorite ... even when I include the possibility of QQ. If I remove KQ (probably prudent) it's pretty much a coinflip, which of course means push with the available pot odds.

Just my bad day ... I pushed, he flipped QQ over and I missed my 2 outs ... duh!

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

Dave D · #6 08-21-2005, 12:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[..] he could have 77 or 99 but this mentality is just too weak-tight for me

[/ QUOTE ]
Since when has being weak/tight been a problem?? If I fold here I still have an average stack, blinds are relatively low, and with my skill-advantage (it's a $10 buy-in) I'm still in great shape.

My point is we have to consider 99 and 77 as a part of villain's possible range of hands.

I ran pokerstove on a possible holding of AQ, KQ, 99 & 77, and interesting enough I'm a big favorite ... even when I include the possibility of QQ. If I remove KQ (probably prudent) it's pretty much a coinflip, which of course means push with the available pot odds.

Just my bad day ... I pushed, he flipped QQ over and I missed my 2 outs ... duh!

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish you didn't say results yet, but I'm still gonna say what I thought before I read it. I think you have to fold because I see a 2pr here, 97. I agree that a normal thinking player wouldnt play QQ that fast here, especially on such a nice flop for him. Rather I see 2 pr playing this way. I'd do the same thing. He knows you raised PF, and I'd just see him trying to protect a weak two pair like this by raising here. If you fold it's good for him, if you push, he calls ahead. Playing anything else that fast just doesn't make sense, unless he's stone cold bluffing. You can't discount that online but... still if I'd have to put him on a hand it's 97. He was getting 5 to 1 to call PF, in the blind people will call with just about anything there.

With that many actors I'd bet the flop like you did, and pretty much fold to a reraise. It sucks, but I think you have to be disciplined about this and fold, as you said you have a fine stack considering blinds and your skill. The only flop I'd consider continuing with this hand seriously would be a set, or maybe a flush draw.

McMelchior · #7 08-21-2005, 12:36 AM

Sorry for the spoiler Dave ... I thought 1h 15m would be sufficient time between my original post and the result, but I guess I should have posted it in white.

My problem with your line of thoughts is, that if I have to give villain credit for calling 97 PF for close to 5% of his stack in a field of 4 (and remember, I haven't seen him play loose during the last 9 hands) I believe I have to give him credit for being able to try to move me off the pot with a draw.

There's no way I can narrow him down to one single hand (like 97) based on the action so far. If I include this hand in his range (QQ,99,77,AQ,97) I end up as a 42:57 dog. Still ignoring the button this is a must move for the pot-odds (t12,300 for t6,200 or pretty much 2:1)!

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

Dave D · #8 08-21-2005, 12:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry for the spoiler Dave ... I thought 1h 15m would be sufficient time between my original post and the result, but I guess I should have posted it in white.

My problem with your line of thoughts is, that if I have to give villain credit for calling 97 PF for close to 5% of his stack in a field of 4 (and remember, I haven't seen him play loose during the last 9 hands) I believe I have to give him credit for being able to try to move me off the pot with a draw.

There's no way I can narrow him down to one single hand (like 97) based on the action so far. If I include this hand in his range (QQ,99,77,AQ,97) I end up as a 42:57 dog. Still ignoring the button this is a must move for the pot-odds (t12,300 for t6,200 or pretty much 2:1)!

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, I was just joking around about telling results.

The important part of what I was trying to say is that I would put BB on any two pair, not neccessarily 97 (though it seems more plausable than say Q7) before I would put him on a set.

I really don't think you have any significant reads on BB. Unless you've seen him before, I would not trust 1 orbit as indicative of anything. If you were going to allow your observation of him to influence you, it would seem he's acting like a good player (raising and then laying down). So you can't put a good player on calling a multiway pot with QQ, a good player would push there or something. A good player also wouldnt have played it so fast.

Most importantly, I would definatly see myself as behind with that many actors, and a raise of my bet. This isnt the easiest laydown, but a disciplined player has to make it. You know you're drawing to two outs, or perhaps the hopes of a board pairing, not good.

WSOPstar2B · #9 08-21-2005, 03:39 AM

I woulda gone over the top on him. Too many donks, especially in low buyins, will go all in w/TPTK. And some of you say that reraising w/a set at the flop is a bad player move. I really beg to differ on that. Based on comments from posters, I'm now inclined to do that move because a lot of you will read it as a bluff or draw bet, and I can get paid off big.

McMelchior · #10 08-21-2005, 10:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
You know you're drawing to two outs

[/ QUOTE ]
This is where you go wrong. Nobody in the world can narrow another players holdings down to one (1) specific hand based on this little information.

This holds especially true in a low-buy-in tournament, where much of the betting and raising is highly impulsive and illogical.

You must consider a range of hands that makes sense based on the play of the hand in question, and on previous experience with the player.

As you said, with only scant experience there's not much to hang your hat on here. And to that range you must add the probability that villain is trying to take you off the hand with a raw bluff. You don't have to watch a $10 buy-in for very long to see instances of that, so not assigning say at least a one in ten probability to a bluff would be poor judgement.

What so many players fail to realize (and what truly renders them "weak/tight") is that poker is a gambling game, and the only way of coming out ahead in the long run is to assess odds as comprehensively as possible based on information present - and then commit your chips when you're getting the right odds.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)