[NL5] KK vs ...

    • pexer0
      Joined: 09.02.2009 Posts: 191
      PokerStars - $0.05 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
      Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

      UTG: 100 BB (VPIP: 20.00, PFR: 16.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 26)
      Hero (CO): 126.2 BB
      BTN: 100 BB (VPIP: 16.67, PFR: 16.67, 3Bet Preflop: 11.11, Hands: 24)
      SB: 100 BB (VPIP: 100.00, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 1)
      BB: 195.8 BB (VPIP: 61.54, PFR: 46.15, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 13)

      SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

      Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has K:heart: K:diamond:

      fold, Hero raises to 3 BB, BTN calls 3 BB, fold, fold

      Flop: (7.4 BB, 2 players) 2:heart: T:heart: 2:club:
      Hero bets 6 BB, BTN calls 6 BB

      Turn: (19.4 BB, 2 players) Q:club:
      Hero bets 14 BB, BTN calls 14 BB

      River: (47.4 BB, 2 players) J:spade:
      Hero bets 34 BB, BTN raises to 77 BB and is all-in, Hero calls 43 BB

      BTN shows 2:spade: 2:diamond: (Four of a Kind, Twos)
      (Pre 18%, Flop 99.9%, Turn 100%)
      Hero shows K:heart: K:diamond: (Two Pair, Kings and Twos)
      (Pre 82%, Flop 0.1%, Turn 0%)
      BTN wins 193 BB

      I was thinking that he was trying to bluff a Straight... But I was blind for the stats that was telling me that he is passive after flop!
  • 8 replies
    • insomnia666
      Joined: 31.07.2010 Posts: 3,063
      OTR check-call.
    • SDK1987
      Joined: 12.11.2008 Posts: 36,400
      I think it’s smart to remove the outcome of the hand next time or put it in a spoiler. If you bet that big on the river you have committed yourself, but checking seems better. There aren’t many weaker hands will call if you bet, but if he’s passive the question is what kind of hands he will bet that you can beat. I think only top pair combo’s. In general I would bet maximum 55% pot against a TAG on every street. Then you don’t get committed in the first place.

    • Bakerrr
      Joined: 20.10.2017 Posts: 7
      Don't think there's anyone at 5NL bluffing their straight blockers frequently enough to pay it much mind.

      Awkward hand... everyone has their own flavour for betsizes but here is too transparent for me, are you cbetting 80% pot with weaker hands on this board? I like 30% on such a board and the larger sizing on the turn once the board becomes more dynamic. Means we can cbet A:club: 3:club: , J:club: 9:club: , J:club: 8:club: , 9:club: 8:club: , 9:club: 7:club: , 9:heart: 9x, all A:heart: hands etc without over committing, also doing this with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT...

      As played I think the river bet (and the sizing if you're going to bet/fold) is big mistake without read on opponent or his ability. You have one of the best bluffcatchers and a spot where opponent is incentive to bluff a number of missed draws and air from a flop where he'll have been reluctant to fold much of his range. Am I right in thinking the only better narrow bluffcatcher we'd get to river with is K:spade: K:diamond: ?

      I suppose it's reasonable to assume that the amount of Q/J/T in a BU flatting range justifies a check-fold if you want to be nitty about it, definitely not getting exploited doing that but at micros I would check-call too readless. Maybe I'm wrong, BU does get to river with 2d2s, QJhh, JTcc, JTdd, QTss, QTdd, K9hh, K9cc, 98hh, maybe even loads of combos of QTo/ JTo at micros...
    • la55i
      Joined: 27.01.2013 Posts: 7,648
      I don't think villain will call a third barrel OTR often enough with weaker hands, so checking would be ok. As played we should at least consider folding because river raises are way too often the nuts.
    • Yahto
      Joined: 21.07.2009 Posts: 21

      A light bulb should arise when someone is calling every bet and when at the river goes all in ,folding would be advised because river raises are way too often the nuts.(as said by la55i)


    • Dr1fter808
      Joined: 11.10.2017 Posts: 128
      Bet sizes are a little big but I think it's OK because we are not scared of QJ/QT since the board is paired from the start. As played on river, against the passive player perhaps we can find the fold button. Against most of the player pool and the unknowns, I think it's fine to call it off because often times not only are they positionally unaware but also unaware of board texture like thinking QJ beats AA on a board like this one.
    • LemOn36
      Joined: 07.02.2009 Posts: 1,815
      Agreed with Bakerrr on flopsizing, 50% at NL5 sounds good - you still get a bunch of value on later streets while allowing him to float more low equity stuff vs you (you've got the Kh too so you don't mind heart turns that much either)
      it influences the rest of the hand a bit and river check call is more of an option then

      As played
      What's out range here AhXh we don't want to bluff really with blocking hands he 100% call call folds
      So . . .what do we bluff here? I can't think of one hand here besides that. Turning a Tx into a bluff sounds great but we don't bet those OTT besides maybe the 3 combos of AT and we're trying to fold out Tx in the first place

      Check call is not all that great with our flop size - most of the floats should be hands like AT AJ QJhh QTccssdd that might not even bet on a board like this but will call a bet AXhh when somany of our hands hit shouldn't bluff much either

      So yeah I like a 1/3 PSB Bet on the river
      And fold to a raise, since even is QT is a better bluffcatcher than KK and we've got all AK with any heart QQ TT A2s etc. that he shouldn't have
    • LemOn36
      Joined: 07.02.2009 Posts: 1,815
      Oh and QTdd QTss seem like the nut check-call hands here you take out TT he flat called and block all those Tx Qx that will check back vs you but can call the mentioned small bet I'd use on the river