Terrified with KK
1/3 NLHE 9 handed.
Just sat down and there's some tough players at the table as well as some loose passives and one nit. Game seems to be fun and gambly. I doubled up from 400 to 800 in the first few hands and I'm the effective stack.
V - Best player in the room by my guess. Plays as high as 50/100 and comes in with a 100k roll of bills. The money at this table is nothing for him. That said, he's very good at poker. I back raised AK into him once pre with a maniac - TAG opens EP, H just calls with AKs from LJ, Maniac 3-bets CO, V cold 4-bets from SB, TAG folds, H 5-bet back raise jams, Maniac folds - V has AA and I get stacked.
---
UTG (tough TAG, very good player) straddles 6, V double straddles UTG+1 to 12, loose passive limps CO for 12, H raises K♠ K♣ to 50 from BTN, BB loose passive cold calls the 50, UTG calls, V calls, CO calls. 5-ways last to act.
Flop 250 (750 back) - 7♠ 7♥ 3♣
Checks through
Turn 250 (750 back) - 9♠
BB checks, UTG checks, V bets 110, CO folds, H calls, BB folds, UTG folds, HU IP.
River 470 (640 back) - 7♣
V pauses for awhile and then bets 10$... Hero?
Not just that, he gets to showdown for free. As demonstrated by the people in this thread who will call this river bet and have admitted to checking back had villain bet nothing.
while this is true, im talking primarily about the argument people keep giving that he never has a hand that can call the river. 100% of his river range can call if he thinks its a bluff (assuming the minbet is always a hand that is blocking / vbing vs ax). like i just dont get it. everyone itt thinking people go around b/f JJ after overcalling pre 60 bb deep to minbet / fold the river on 77397 vs a flop x back and river raise
is a really long thread that makes me suspicious that anyone on the forum actually plays poker
while this is true, im talking primarily about the argument people keep giving that he never has a hand that can call the river. 100% of his river range can call if he thinks its a bluff (assuming the minbet is always a hand that is blocking / vbing vs ax). like i just dont get it. everyone itt thinking people go around b/f JJ after overcalling pre 60 bb deep to minbet / fold the river on 77397 vs a flop x back and river raise
is a really lo
Yeah in full agreement tbh.
V always has 9x or a low missed draw trying to confuse a bigger missed draw,
He probably never plays 7x on turn like this and probably not 2x either.
Raise river seems beyond mandatory for a bunch of reasons, primarily including a good player will know he will have to bet call 9x on river sometimes when draws brick
But also if he sees you play KK this weak it can't be good for your future game EV with him
truly final thoughts for this thread.
i actually think flop x is the best option with our hand, i find it pretty tough to find many hands that are going to call down on this board given texture (even something like 733 vs 773 gives more top pairs that could plausibly put in bets) and pre ranges (probably most pairs from the good people sqz pre) and also how big the pot is compared to normal 1/3 hands. especially seeing what the best player in the world is doing pre, i think he's going to end up overplaying things and also just generally spewing post into capped ranges to justify vpip.
is interesting line though from v and i think turn stab probably over performs given how terrified ppl are here vs a 45% turn psb (cant imagine op is defending pairs below 9x or random ace highs and probably bb doesnt have much). river id imagine he has experience doing this and it looks like with all due respect unsophisticated people respond extremely poorly / polarized vs this. like what stands out to me in the thread is people keep harping on him betting the river while refusing to look at the size; the minbet is being treated the same way pot or an overbet would be. it kind of shows how people don't raise enough vs block bets otr in general, but on steroids. is maybe worth implementing vs fish in some spots tbh
also like people can be good at poker or big winners in their game and still turn into spots depending on if they're bored or tilted or drunk or the game is too small or whatever. even if the guy is 2010 phil ivey levels of dominance post, it seems unlikely he isn't going to be a large loser in the game if he's straddling and double straddling when others aren't and vpiping 40+%. NL just too tough of a game to play loose in and not get punished, particularly in bloated pots. pre (both the double straddle and the defend) indicates to me he's there to spew in general, and yet people think he's there to hero fold full houses postflop lol
My man put 4bbs in without cards, another 13bbs in OOP 4-way w J3s, and led for half pot in a 5-way pot with a pair of tres, but FROM NOW ON he's a lockbox. Not a dollar more goes in without a hand that beats the 3rd nuts!
And if our hole cards were different, I'm sure he wouldn't fall for a bluff either. He'd use the force to pull a 7 from the muck if he had to! Use Jedi mind tricks on the dealer to convince him that 7s full of 3s beat 7s full of Ks if he had to. This man has been on TELEVISION!!
what are these value hands you're trying to block? how often do you get to the river when he bets the turn into 3 when you still have a player left to act with a hand w/o sdv that doesn't have 2 spades in it? what hands would you bluff with?
Assuming we get to the river with roughly: 99+/AsKs/AsQs ... I find it hard to believe KK is a clear bet/fold. That might be a great exploit vs. random 1-3 fish, but I'd rather check KK than bet/fold I think.
No idea if a solver can tell us anything useful due to going 666 ways, but my first guess would be it'd want to turn the two NFD hands into a bluff and balance that with AsA/KsK (maybe QsQ) hands.
Obviously no, but I also don't think an extra 5% of the pot is enough value to reopen the betting (if we plan to bet/fold -- although maybe we get him to min. 3bet to $60 and just call then?).
As I'd said in my first post, I assume we are supposed to raise to like $100, maybe even a bit bigger, and an extra 25% of pot is def. worth something but I read a lot of arguments that amounted to "we have to raise and don't worry about getting 3bet that'll never happen and/or we can just fold" which I'm not inclined to believe, but then...
...so maybe not much point in thinking more about it anyway, *shrugs*.
Question: If you believe that Villain won't call with anything but quads, shouldn't you be bluffing with everything in your range that doesn't have showdown value at the minimum bet size you think he's going to fold?
Do you really do this in your games?
Question: If you believe that Villain won't call with anything but quads, shouldn't you be bluffing with everything in your range that doesn't have showdown value at the minimum bet size you think he's going to fold?
Do you really do this in your games?
Tell me a hand he gets here with played this way that calls?
Oh and btw, if you have AK and the dude is minibetting a bottom full house with a 3, you have to raise your A high to make that 3 fold, yes?
But you aren't answering the question. If you think he has JJ or TT and that he folds them to a raise, you should be raising with all your non-showdown hands, yes?
I don't think he ever has TT or JJ here. That is my point. He never has a hand that he is calling a raise with. And he might bluff/shove if he's that type of player. Raising AK would be interesting, but are you flatting turn with AK? I mean, we can throw in all the hypotheticals we want, but I still don't think he has a hand he will call with. What hand do you play this way that you call with?
I don't mind if you want to raise river, but I do mind if your plan is to raise/fold.
Question: If you believe that Villain won't call with anything but quads, shouldn't you be bluffing with everything in your range that doesn't have showdown value at the minimum bet size you think he's going to fold?
Do you really do this in your games?
Correct.
Obviously the logic in thinking he only calls quads is wrong, but you are correct if that was your reasoning.
I don't think he ever has TT or JJ here. That is my point. He never has a hand that he is calling a raise with. And he might bluff/shove if he's that type of player. Raising AK would be interesting, but are you flatting turn with AK? I mean, we can throw in all the hypotheticals we want, but I still don't think he has a hand he will call with. What hand do you play this way that you call with?
I don't mind if you want to raise river, but I d
Wrong.
Also looking back at the hand, what do people believe about villain's hand given his turn bet sizing?
Like, yes it's multiway, so you can't go very big. But 7x is a hand that's vulnerable to flushes. I tend to think that fish size more in this situation, but even for me, I think I am sizing at least 50% with trips in a dynamic board multiway. So while I cannot say for sure that Villain has quads, he can certainly have busted draws or some other kind of full house.
One would also think that a busted flush draw bets more on the river.
The only thing that would change this for me is knowing how V sees H, and we still don't know that.
I don't think he ever has TT or JJ here. That is my point. He never has a hand that he is calling a raise with. And he might bluff/shove if he's that type of player. Raising AK would be interesting, but are you flatting turn with AK? I mean, we can throw in all the hypotheticals we want, but I still don't think he has a hand he will call with. What hand do you play this way that you call with?
I don't mind if you want to raise river, but I
The logic of my question is to take your logic to another logical conclusion which is that if he isn't calling with anything but quads, then we should be bluffing with everything that can't withstand calling the small river bet.
I looked at the hand and the non-showdown hands we have are mostly busted flush draws. And we should have a bunch of them.
All suited Spade Aces, KQss, KJss, KTss, QJss, QTss JTss, maybe even some 56ss and 54ss. That's at least 15 combos.
Last but not least, if you think he doesn't call with anything other than quads, that doesn't mean that his range is only quads.
And I don't think that villain goes for the small blocking bet with complete air in the hopes you reraise him so that he can shove it in your face. The reason is that he gets called by a ton of middle strength hands he's losing to.
Btw, if we disabuse ourselves from the idea that this guy is good at poker and we view him instead as a garden variety fish, his play makes absolute sense. He's playing the strength of his hand. You would expect him to make big bets when his hands are nutty and small blocking bets when he's got weak hands that want to see showdown.
The only thing that would change this for me is knowing how V sees H, and we still don't know that.
Absolutely irrelevant. River is a check. We bet(raise) for value.
Honestly the range construction on this forum is hilariously sad.
Like you've been a member since 2006 and the best you can do is assign villain quads? Incredible.
Wow, reading comprehension is severely lacking in you guys. I never said he calls only with quads. I said there is no logical hand for him to have that calls -- that he plays this way. I actually believe what the OP tells me -- that's the point of giving player descriptions. How he played this one hand means nothing in regard to how good he is. Maybe he was going to shove the river as a bluff. Maybe he was just screwing around for fun. Who knows? Doesn't change the fact that OP says he is the best player in the room, and I do think he could easily shove river if he has any reason to believe OP will fold. Is OP a calling station, scared money, tight, maniac? I have no idea. I don't see the point of raising river if my plan is to fold to a shove.
For reference - this V has played on TV, tours europe and plays wsop. Thats what I mean when I say he's good.
^ nah sorry they are actually crushing the game. Ive seen their graphs and gone for drinks with them once or twice. Not sure what you and Overt find bad about V's line though. V was waiting for the bigger game to open and this was the only table running.. I'm not sure whats so hard to believe, I'm not going to dox myself and say who
I am sure OP is making it up.
Wow, reading comprehension is severely lacking in you guys. I never said he calls only with quads. I said there is no logical hand for him to have that calls -- that he plays this way. I actually believe what the OP tells me -- that's the point of giving player descriptions. How he played this one hand means nothing in regard to how good he is. Maybe he was going to shove the river as a bluff. Maybe he was just screwing around for fun. Who
Word salad
Wow, reading comprehension is severely lacking in you guys. I never said he calls only with quads. I said there is no logical hand for him to have that calls -- that he plays this way. I actually believe what the OP tells me -- that's the point of giving player descriptions. How he played this one hand means nothing in regard to how good he is. Maybe he was going to shove the river as a bluff. Maybe he was just screwing around for fun. Who
So you don't have bet folds in your arsenal?
Also, I think we can agree that if someone gave us this hand history in a vacuum and told us to judge villain's play, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to conclude that he's a fish. The fact that banana looks at a guy who calls a 5x HJ raise with J3s from the BB then block bets 2.3% of the pot on the river and wonders why we think he's a bad player is perplexing.
The majority of the facts mentioned about him do not conclusively support the idea he's a good player. 4betting and 5betting AA doesn't make you a crasher, fish also play on TV and go trips to play big tourneys in Europe, occasionally get hot and win big tourneys.
Like, banana could be playing with Jamie Gold. Jamie Gold isn't good at poker.
