11 posts / 0 new
Last post
cdon3822's picture
KK on wet A high board facing NAI c/r

KK cbet and face NAI c/r on AQT tt.

His range is basically polarised between Ax and FDs. 

Is jamming or flatting NAI c/r better? 

 

No Limit Holdem Tournament • 2 Players

$6.85+$0.15

Hand converted by the official HUSNG.com hand converter

SB Hero 500  
BB angelll333 500  

Effective Stacks: 25bb

Blinds 10/20

Pre-Flop (30, 2 players)

Hero is SB

dKhK

Hero raises to 40, angelll333 calls 20

Flop (80, 2 players)

cThAcQ

angelll333 checks, Hero bets 40, angelll333 raises to 80, Hero goes all-in 460, angelll333 goes all-in 380

Turn (1000, 2 players, 2 all-in)

h5

River (1000, 2 players, 2 all-in)

d4

Final Pot: 1000

Hero shows a pair of Kings

dKhK

angelll333 shows two pair, Aces and Fours

sAs4

angelll333 wins 1000 ( won +500 )

Hero lost -500

ARRONWILSON's picture
See this hand happen alot, I

See this hand happen alot, I think checking flop is better, your cbet is not polar enough and is just a bluffcatcher when he c/r you here.  His air is just folding to your cbet most of the time, if he c/r air here your shove just folds that out and only gets called by ace x or better or a flush draw, and I think most players with a flush draw here like 6 8 clubs is just gona flat call cause they should expect to have no fold equity on that kind of flop.  I think a min c/r on that flop is ace x or q 10, flopped straight is less likely as you have 2 blockers.  

Dipl.Komp.'s picture
i agree. you will only get

i agree. you will only get calls from hands that beat you or that have a lot of equity against you. on such a board, even a textbook maniac will play pretty honest. there are just no bluffs in villains range. and against his actual range you look pretty bad. i did a quick simulation on PPT and you actually are a 30% dog at best. i gave villain a range of KJ, Ax, QT and any flushdraw assuming a calling range of 90%. the more narrow his calling range the worse your equity looks.
 
unfortunately i cannot embed simulations of PPT, nor post a link here in a post, because it triggers the spam filter. does anyone know why?
 
edit: as for your question, i think it´s better to call the minraise and fold to further pressure on any turn but a J or a K.
 
cheers
s.

cdon3822's picture
Very helpful comments,

Very helpful comments, thankyou.
I think this board is such an autocbet with all my air that I naturally wanted to also bet my medium strength hands too.
Following the same logic, would you be checking back Qx, Tx, JJ, 99-66 ?
Would you cbet your weak FDs and fold to a c/r?
Are you bet and calling off with your strong FDs here?
 
Following your comments I was giving some thought to villain's decision on the turn if I check back the flop.
In a readless conext I am somewhat suspicious if a villain checks back an A high board where the player in position will normally cbet with the initiative in a single raised pot.
As such, I don't think we risk being 2barrel bluffed off the best hand very often by villain leading turn and 2barreling the river if we check back.
So as a default we could certainly take a check back flop, call turn lead (if villain leads turn) and make a decision on the river based on bet sizing if the draws miss.
 
I have had the same problem uploading images => the interface I get for uploading images isn't even in english.

Dipl.Komp.'s picture
yes, i would check back

yes, i would check back everything that has showdownvalue (except for Ax, i´d value bet that for sure)
as for my weak FDs i am not shure. i´d hate being raised out of the pot. 68s is not good enough to stack off on the flop. it depends a lot on villain. if he´s a guy who folds to a cbet like 60% of the time, i have no problem bet folding a weak FD to a large raise (a minraise, i´d call though). against a calling station though who will call you twice with a gutshot like J5o, i´d rather take a free card and value bet the hell out of him if i hit. against an unknown... hm... i´d probably bet and call a minraise.
 
edit: a good FD (meaning: containing the Kc or Jc) i will be willing to stack off with. we pretty much have a coinflip (44-53%) against villain´s range here.

laurents's picture
FE

Lets not forget about FE. This is not an factor that can be taken lightly.

LVT

Dipl.Komp.'s picture
can you specify what you mean

can you specify what you mean exactly?

laurents's picture
sorry

I had wroten an entire piece but had some problems with the website and kept it a bit shorter. What I mean than an c-bet will get a lot of folds. This isn't a board for value but a board where you want to take the pot down as fast as possible. We know he had the ace this time, but how many time would villain has aces? Not that much because most of them will be played differently. So we get some folds on the c-bet and some flat calls and some check-raises. This information is very usefull to have because it gives us information about what we decide next. If we check we are a sitting duck waiting to be exploit. If he leads out on the turn we don't know anything and we are shooting in the dark. The big mistake isn't the c-bet, the mistake is going all-in after his re-raise. As the c-bet helped to decide what hand he had and this information is very usefull when handled properly.

LVT

Dipl.Komp.'s picture
no, i don´t think FE is an

no, i don´t think FE is an issue in this particular hand. on that board we have a small pot hand here and we should treat it like that. if we bet, we can´t really fold to a min-checkraise, because we get the (implied) odds, but if we bet and call a raise, we also inflate the pot with a hand that doesn´t justify a big pot. think about it: why would we need fold equity here? which hands are folding to a bet? hands that have no equity against us anyway. we are only keeping the hands in the pot that are ahead or that have some decent equity. why do you want to isolate yourself against a range against which you are a 30% dog? if we bet the flop, it´s a classic "win small pot or lose big pot" thing.
 
in other words: the fold equity in this hand increases your pot equity only so marginally that it is of no importance in the hand. against the range that has you dominated 70/30, you don´t have fold equity. and against all other hands, you don´t need fold equity, because you are so far ahead. it´s also important to think about one of the crucial concepts in poker: what is the purpose of a bet?
a) make better hands fold
b) make weaker hands pay
 
because a) will not happen ever and b) will not happen often enough, a bet on the flop makes no sense.
 
or was your answer directed towards a hypothetical hand like 86s, we might hold on the flop? then of course betting is a good option to chase away hands that have equity vs us (again: depending on villain)
 
cheers
s.

laurents's picture
it depends

It depends on his range. But lets say he is 3-betting every pair, A4s+, A6os+ and hands like KQ and maybe KJ. Pretty standard. Lets say that he flat calls 41%. Again pretty standard. Now we will see that we are big time favorite against his range with 78%. I have no clue how you come up with the numbers you provided, but this is my calculation. If he c-bet there is value because you will get many flat calls, hand protection against many draws and there is FE. You say it is a small pot, but I disagree. 8% of both of the players are in the pot. I would not consider that as a small pot.

LVT

Dipl.Komp.'s picture
if you want to isolate

if you want to isolate yourself against hands that are far ahead and have decent equity against you, feel free to do so. again: if you bet here, you don´t gain anything. how many worse hands will call you here? why would you need worse hands to fold on that board vs your actual holding? a bet on that flop usually yields two scenarios: a) a fold, b) a raise which will get us into an awkward spot.
 
the numbers i gave are explained a couple of posts above. how does villain´s checkraising range look like. against that, we´re toast. against anything else, we shouldn´t be afraid of giving a free card, because the danger of being sucked out is miniscule. there are situations where it may be better to give a free card to a 5 outer than to risk losing the whole stack. this is really not a flop where i want to stack off with KK. what if you get checkraised all-in? do you think that bet folding KK is a viable option? against his range you´d have to. what if you get raised non-all-in? are you calling the flop? what about the turn then? and the river? are you prepared to play the guessing game and essentially hope that villain is a complete moron who will bluff raise you on that board? are you willing to be drawn into a reverse implied odds scenario? the bigger the pot gets, the less you should like your KK here.
don´t confuse his overall range (against which we surely are a big favourite) with the range he will continue with vs a bet (or even raising). that is a huge difference. my numbers (70/30) apply merely to villain´s checkraising range (though his calling range shouldn´t be a whole lot wider, because on that flop even many Tx will have a hard time calling). probably his checkraising range is even tighter, becaus he might not raise our bet with a bad flushdraw.
 
and yes, this is a small pot in a hyper format. it´s the second smallest it can get on the flop.
 
and again: using the term "fold equity" is not applicable in this example, because we don´t need fold equity against hands that are behind and we won´t get it against hands that want to give us action. "fold equity" is a variable that helps us to determine, whether a (semi) bluff is profitable in the long run. if you use the term "fold equity", it implies that you are turning your pair of kings into a bluff, which is nonsense for 2 reasons: a) you have showdownvalue and therefore don´t need to bluff to win the pot   b) your bluff won´t work ever against any hand that is better
 
cheers
s.