NL10 - AdKd - Good fold?

I think you can fold already OTT. Villain would have 3bet KK+ and probably AK pre. He has 5x and 88 in his range. You said he is pretty passive so when he starts raisin, you can fold. You can apply Baluga Theorem here.

Baluga Theorem ?
I'll have to google that haha

Originally posted by stompy91
Baluga Theorem ?
I'll have to google that haha

When you get raised on the turn, you should consider folding if you do not hold at least top 2 pair.

I like fold vs reg. I don't see myself folding vs spewier players though I think they have enough worse Kx in their flatting range, they could take that line with additional 24 combos of Kx, I see a lot of weaker players massively overplaying their top pairs and on that board there really isn't many combos that beat us. (1)55, (2)88, (1)A5s.(1)76s

The info that villain is passive is vital. When a passive villain starts betting and raising - you are done if not holding nuts.

The main point here, for me, was ur cbet.
I would have made it way smaller on this board... doesnt hit many hands, and betting hard like u did just the strongest ones ll continue.
On the turn u can already fold. Even more when u showed a lot of strengh.

And it is nasty that you are both so deep.

Originally posted by nitrol
And it is nasty that you are both so deep.

For me, its when the true poker really happens.

ok, but it is notso good for our hand. We cannot play for stacks.

Against a non-passive opponent a turn call is OK because it's such a thin value range, but if villain is passive then turn should be a fold. He's not usually doing that with KQ.

Tough spot. But if you were willing to call the raise on the turn, you must have thought you were ahead. Don't really see the 4♥: changing anything. So, you should have folded on the turn, or you should have called the river.

Originally posted by MrPink578
Tough spot. But if you were willing to call the raise on the turn, you must have thought you were ahead. Don't really see the 4♥: changing anything. So, you should have folded on the turn, or you should have called the river.

+1 friend. Logical and effective thinking.
The 4h doesnt improves villain's range at all. Still, the bet on the river makes more likely he really has a hand that have us beat.

In this particular hand its just a fold ott bc he looks way passive overall.

I would bet/fold this on the turn by default and this villain does not look like someone against whom I would change my default play, since he not seems very aggressive. The most probable hand he has there, imo, is 88, but something like A5 is also possible. I don't fully agree that if we call the turn, we have to call this river because sometimes players are able to check/raise draws on the turn, but aren't able to shove river unimproved. Anyway, I don't think this villain has a draw on the turn.

I was planning on calling a river bet but the sizing looks very value heavy to me.

Alleen, do u think its reasonable calling an OR from CO w 67 on SB?

Originally posted by la55i
He has 5x and 88 in his range.

I agree with everything you say except this one. 88 ofc, but what 5x hands would you flat from SB?

A 30/19 guy can have some 5x - A5, 56, 54, 75. But this is not that much combos.

Originally posted by nitrol
A 30/19 guy can have some 5x - A5, 56, 54, 75. But this is not that much combos.

Even more when u add that its just the suited version of these, IF they have it on range.

Originally posted by Afulibador
Alleen, do u think its reasonable calling an OR from CO w 67 on SB?

I think usually not, except a CO opens small, like 2bb-2,5bb and is a recreational player who doesn't fold to 3bets. Otherwise 76s is a default bluff 3bet for me.