10NL KK.. should i bet this turn?

[creamfillin]

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool (http://poker-tools.flopturnriver.com/Hand-Converter.php) from FlopTurnRiver.com (http://www.flopturnriver.com) (Format: 2+2 Forums)

SB ($25.95)
BB ($8.05)
UTG ($9.65)
MP ($7.90)
Hero ($10.65)
Button ($5.60)

Preflop: Hero is CO with K/images/graemlins/club.gif, K/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $0.4</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB calls $0.35, BB calls $0.30.

Flop: ($1.20) 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 4/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets $0.4</font>, BB calls $0.40, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $1.6</font>, SB folds, BB calls $1.20.

Turn: ($4.80) 3/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $2.5</font>, BB calls $2.50.

River: ($9.80) 8/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">BB bets $3.55 (All-In)</font>, Hero folds.

Final Pot: $13.35

[elmopoker]

yep and i'd call the river too.

[Sean Fraley]

BB smooth calling SB's bet and your raise makes on the flop puts me on alert but could also be a straight draw, therefore I wouldn't want to give a free card on the turn. The 1/2 pot turn bet is sufficient for this, but I wouldn't put any more money in after that. River fold is good.

[crushednuts]

Bet more on the turn if you are going to bet..this will make your river decision easy.

[DawnToDusk]

I think you should bet the turn. I guess my judgement is kind of biased because you asked about a turn line and included the river line so I kind of was able to adjust my range for the villian.

But I guess if I just had the information up to the point where you bet the turn your villians range could be hanging around with two overs (don't have any info on him so I am just making some assumptions about his range), a straight draw (such as A5, A2, 78), TP (such as A6), and maybe a set.

More often than not I feel like you will be looking at a range of hands that you are beating as opposed to ones you aren't. The way the hand was played in that he called a PF raise OOP, and then called a bet that someone bet into and then a raise from you on the flop denotes some genuine strength, but more often then not I think you are still ahead of his range.

Even on the river I think you have a call. You are being offered 3.7-to-1 odds and I think you will be better than 3-to-1 (as in you will win more than one time in four). You could be looking at a set, or A6cc. But I wouldnt be surprised if your villian was in there with 78 and now hit top pair and thinks hes good.

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
yep and i'd call the river too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Calling the river puts almost all of Hero's stack in the pot with nothing better than top pair against an opponent who seems to have been skowplaying a straight. Big pots are for big hands, and hero doesn't have one. He played it fine.

[DawnToDusk]

Well a slowplayed straight would mean villian has 75 or 52. I wasn't given any information on the villian but if I had to play this like it was one of my first orbits I would assume that the player has a tighter PF calling range than that. I make the assumption people like their money until they can prove otherwise.

[creamfillin]

Villain was 53/8/.6 after 62 hands

[J. Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yep and i'd call the river too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Calling the river puts almost all of Hero's stack in the pot with nothing better than top pair against an opponent who seems to have been skowplaying a straight. Big pots are for big hands, and hero doesn't have one. He played it fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

we still beat some of his holdings here. flopped two pair, an over pair, just top pair. his play looks like he slowplayed something big or that he's retarded with something less. Retarded or big hand, idk, i'd call.

[DawnToDusk]

Thats proof enough. I might change my standards for sure now. Seems pretty passive when playing too so you might be looking at a slowplayed straight. I feel like he would call down with TP, even if he made it on the river. Set may be possible here too. Given what everyone has said so far why don't you assign some probabilities to what your opponent could have and then see if a call on the river is +EV. I think a turn bet is profitable as his range is still pretty wide, but on the river you can narrow it down some.

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
Well a slowplayed straight would mean villian has 75 or 52. I wasn't given any information on the villian but if I had to play this like it was one of my first orbits I would assume that the player has a tighter PF calling range than that. I make the assumption people like their money until they can prove otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

With no reads here, we can still assume that a slightly loose villain might call with suited one gappers like 75s. Also, I have to wonder what is calling a first a flop bet, and then a flop raise. On the turn, not wanting to give a free card is a good reason to bet. The key issue with deciding whether or not to call the river is pot size. We only have an overpair which really isn't a big pot hand, and we have a villain who wakes up on the river and wants to get the rest of his stack in.

One of the things that I have been starting to realize lately in situations like this is that it isn't just whether or not you might be ahead, but how much you would have to pay to find out you were wrong.

Big hand, big pot. Small hand, small pot. This is really starting to hit home recently.

[DawnToDusk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well a slowplayed straight would mean villian has 75 or 52. I wasn't given any information on the villian but if I had to play this like it was one of my first orbits I would assume that the player has a tighter PF calling range than that. I make the assumption people like their money until they can prove otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

With no reads here, we can still assume that a slightly loose villain might call with suited one gappers like 75s. Also, I have to wonder what is calling a first a flop bet, and then a flop raise. On the turn, not wanting to give a free card is a good reason to bet. The key issue with deciding whether or not to call the river is pot size. We only have an overpair which really isn't a big pot hand, and we have a villain who wakes up on the river and wants to get the rest of his stack in.

One of the things that I have been starting to realize lately in situations like this is that it isn't just whether or not you might be ahead, but how much you would have to pay to find out you were wrong.

Big hand, big pot. Small hand, small pot. This is really starting to hit home recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your reasoning makes perfect logical sense. I guess I have a little different standards than you do when not knowing anything about an opponent.

There are lots of ways our opponent could of got there on the river or even had it on the flop. His call on a raise PF and of a bet and then a raise on the flop does denote strength. I suggest to cream that he makes a little chart/equation of possible hands and assign them a probability that the villian has and see if his hand is +EV to call on the river. As I learn more about our villian I am starting to get the feeling that it isn't going to be.

But lets look at the river another way. OP asks about the turn bet. What if he didn't bet and then the villian had bet the river. What would you do then?

[Debaser]

[ QUOTE ]
With no reads here, we can still assume that a slightly loose villain might call with suited one gappers like 75s. Also, I have to wonder what is calling a first a flop bet, and then a flop raise. On the turn, not wanting to give a free card is a good reason to bet. The key issue with deciding whether or not to call the river is pot size. We only have an overpair which really isn't a big pot hand, and we have a villain who wakes up on the river and wants to get the rest of his stack in.

One of the things that I have been starting to realize lately in situations like this is that it isn't just whether or not you might be ahead, but how much you would have to pay to find out you were wrong.

Big hand, big pot. Small hand, small pot. This is really starting to hit home recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

With KK on this board we have a big hand. IMO folding here is not only wrong, it's absolutely shocking.

We're getting 4-1 on this river call and there's so much we beat it would take me a week to write it all out. If you call and he shows you a big hand then just type 'nh' and reload but I think we're winning here over 50% of the time.

If you routinely fold big hands like this for small bets then even at tiny stakes you're going to get trampled all over.

[DawnToDusk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With no reads here, we can still assume that a slightly loose villain might call with suited one gappers like 75s. Also, I have to wonder what is calling a first a flop bet, and then a flop raise. On the turn, not wanting to give a free card is a good reason to bet. The key issue with deciding whether or not to call the river is pot size. We only have an overpair which really isn't a big pot hand, and we have a villain who wakes up on the river and wants to get the rest of his stack in.

One of the things that I have been starting to realize lately in situations like this is that it isn't just whether or not you might be ahead, but how much you would have to pay to find out you were wrong.

Big hand, big pot. Small hand, small pot. This is really starting to hit home recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

With KK on this board we have a big hand. IMO folding here is not only wrong, it's absolutely shocking.

We're getting 4-1 on this river call and there's so much we beat it would take me a week to write it all out. If you call and he shows you a big hand then just type 'nh' and reload but I think we're winning here over 50% of the time.

If you routinely fold big hands like this for small bets then even at tiny stakes you're going to get trampled all over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain was 53/8/.6 after 62 hands.

Villians range is pretty wide and he is pretty passive. He could turn over a number of things on the river that have us beat. He could of even called down with TP (from the flop) and his 6 and kicker could of been clubs.

I see players with low aggression rates that lead me to believe they are pretty passive. For the most part they are, but that doesn't mean they won't come alive with a strong hand and try to get their money in.

With those stats given, what range do you put your villian on when he pushes on the river?

[wulfpacker21]

id put him on an A5 busted straight draw

[Debaser]

[ QUOTE ]
Villain was 53/8/.6 after 62 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

The .6 agg is obviously a cause for concern but playing 53/8 still makes him a pretty damn busy player.

[ QUOTE ]
With those stats given, what range do you put your villian on when he pushes on the river?


[/ QUOTE ]

Once villain calls the turn bet, even some passive players think 'oh well f it, if I check the river he's gonna bet anyway so I might as well stick it in' We beat 22, 55, 77, 99-QQ, x5, Ace whatever, 64, 86 + all manner of retarded hands that will frequently show up at 10nl.

Plus we're getting HUGE odds to call.

If he flopped a straight or backdoored a flush then good luck to him, cos he's getting instacalled by me in this spot every single time.

[Archon_Wing]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With no reads here, we can still assume that a slightly loose villain might call with suited one gappers like 75s. Also, I have to wonder what is calling a first a flop bet, and then a flop raise. On the turn, not wanting to give a free card is a good reason to bet. The key issue with deciding whether or not to call the river is pot size. We only have an overpair which really isn't a big pot hand, and we have a villain who wakes up on the river and wants to get the rest of his stack in.

One of the things that I have been starting to realize lately in situations like this is that it isn't just whether or not you might be ahead, but how much you would have to pay to find out you were wrong.

Big hand, big pot. Small hand, small pot. This is really starting to hit home recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

With KK on this board we have a big hand. IMO folding here is not only wrong, it's absolutely shocking.

We're getting 4-1 on this river call and there's so much we beat it would take me a week to write it all out. If you call and he shows you a big hand then just type 'nh' and reload but I think we're winning here over 50% of the time.

If you routinely fold big hands like this for small bets then even at tiny stakes you're going to get trampled all over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why very yes. Well put. /images/graemlins/wink.gif We can no longer think "big pot, big hand" because well... it already happened and we are already on the river. If a small part of our stack was invested (which it really shouldn't be in this case) then you could argue that.

I am very confident we can win 25% of the time here. Is that too much to ask?

[Sean Fraley]

Two pair is your average winning hand in hold 'em, as in completely middle of the road. We have a loose, very passive villain who has called all of the way to the river then suddenly decided that he wanted to get all of his chips in the middle. You really need to look at this hand from the perspective of this kind of villain, play it as if you were the villain. First of all, you really aren't giving much thought to what your opponent might have, you are looking at just your two cards and comparing them to what the board says might be out there. You normally decide the strength of your hand by comparing it to the board, not on what your opponent has done. When deciding to call, raise, or fold you do so based on how strong you think your hand is, and what you think gets the money. You slowplay big hands until the river because you have been caught by that before. You overvalue TPTK and overpairs because you have been nailed by better kickers and pairs higher than the board. If you don't think that someone has the big hand on the board, you call down so you don't lose your whole stack if you are wrong. This is the kind of villain we are up against here. If this guy isn't shoving two pair or less on the river. We are beat here more than 25% of the time.

Playing poker isn't really about odds and ranges. It's about being able to think from your opponent's perspective and using what you learn in that fashion to figure out what those bets, calls, and folds mean. In this situation, if you take the time to try and think like a very loose, very passive player, you begin to see that it would be a very rare occasion if this shove on the river is something that we beat.

[Archon_Wing]

Why are you so intent on protecting your stack? This isn't a tournament.

I have this feeling you're misapplying some concepts here. We play pot control with marginal hands like TPTK and slight overpairs because we don't want the pot to get too large and thus commit too many chips in there. We won't lose our stack because we will have poor odds to call a villain's push or we know better then to call pot sized bets down to the river. On this river when most of the money has gone in, is not the time to think of pot control. Trying to preserve the last 1/3 of your stack while potentially missing out on value when your opponent does something dumb is just not that great. In other words I would not want to commit a large amount of chips with a one pair hand into a small pot. This however, is not the case, the pot's already large. I understand that I'll probably be beat most of the time, but I have make a correct fold about 80% of the time just to break even. I don't have that kind of confidence in such a read based on the available info. Oh and btw, even a complete idiot [villain prob]knows that they don't have that much more behind them, and many might speculate it's going in regardless. One doesn't need to know about poker to realize that.

[ QUOTE ]
Playing poker isn't really about odds and ranges. It's about being able to think from your opponent's perspective and using what you learn in that fashion to figure out what those bets, calls, and folds mean. In this situation, if you take the time to try and think like a very loose, very passive player, you begin to see that it would be a very rare occasion if this shove on the river is something that we beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? Sorry, but odds and ranges are huge! Reads are also important but online it's much harder to read people, and I'm not Phil Hellmuth. I cannot read into their soul. Given the irrationality of people at uNL and the fact that no two donks are the same, I would focus on building up on the basics rather than try to read someone who isn't really thinking. It is simply better to learn how to play ABC first and then learn how to play other people's cards.

I think I will be pretty adamant on this point though-- you don't profit at uNL via big laydowns, even if it does seem cool.

[Mal_Pais]

We're stacking 99, TT, JJ, and QQ. He's not calling the flop raise with a backdoor flush draw. Villian didn't wake up on the river, he realized most of his stack was already in the pot. Its a small amount and we don't have to be good very often to make this call. Call the river.

[ QUOTE ]
Playing poker isn't really about odds and ranges. It's about being able to think from your opponent's perspective and using what you learn in that fashion to figure out what those bets, calls, and folds mean. In this situation, if you take the time to try and think like a very loose, very passive player, you begin to see that it would be a very rare occasion if this shove on the river is something that we beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

In theory, its always good to think on multiple levels. But only if we are playing against a thinking opponent. A 52/8/.something Villian isn't thinking past his two cards. I can't begin to comprehend what he may be thinking, nor do I want to try to figure out what his passive play means when I have KK on this board. I call this river all day for that small bet.

[spyderracing]

Bet more on turn. Call river. Line is really weird. If he went runner runner that sucks but I think (especially at 10nl) you see a lot of stuff here that you beat.

[elmopoker]

[ QUOTE ]
We're stacking 99, TT, JJ, and QQ. He's not calling the flop raise with a backdoor flush draw. Villian didn't wake up on the river, he realized most of his stack was already in the pot. Its a small amount and we don't have to be good very often to make this call. Call the river.


[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Villians entire line here screams top pair or some weak hand. He's not willing to give up and his shoving is his last ditch effort to try to take down the pot. If villian flopped a straight then that's unlucky, but there are so many other hands that he could be holding that we beat. I call here every time.