How ugly is this call with KK, 10/20 deep.

[DanK]

Villain in this hand is PinkRazor, a good tricky very aggresive player. I dont have the HH but this is almost exaclty how it went down. Efective stacks 3.8k
He probaly sees me as an fairly aggresive but good player, while somewhat loose and known to gamble with draws, but who slows way down once people start making larger bets/raises vs me.


I open raise UTG+1 with KK to 75, all fold around to PinkRazor who makes it 275, I call. Flop is 458r (550), he bets 400, I call. Turn is T (1350), he checks, I think a fairly long time about what I do if I bet and he check riases, finally I bet 900, he moves in very quickly and I instacall.

On the turn I basicly desided that if i make a reasonable bet this would be an ideal spot to push someone off jj-kk from his point of view, and up till now iv played my hand very consistently with jj-kk.

Any how, how foolhardy was this hand, rip in...

[Hay Guyz]

I think you should have raised the flop.

[DanK]

OK...whats my plan then for the turn if he bets in to me a decnet amount, or i get checked to?

[Keepitsimple]

Whats his reraising range from the blinds when you raise from UTG+1? I would put you on set or overpair on the turn. So I wouldnt push without AA+. But maybe this guy would try to push you off JJ-KK. I wouldnt try that though.

[fslexcduck]

nh, holla.

[fslexcduck]

seriously, i think if villain is aggressive this is a nice line to win a lot. a more conservative approach with also be to check behind and call a very large river bet. but since K's usually rank to be pretty good and he is really representing a pocket pair here (whether he has it or not, obv) then i don't mind this line at all.

[BLdSWtTRs]

Your line seems fine. 70% you are ahead and the way you played it makes it look more like a bluff.

[samoleus]

very good post duck: I agree that your line is a great one against a super aggressive and/or overplaying villain. But checking behind and calling a river bet or betting if checked to is a reasonable conservative alternative.

[BLdSWtTRs]

[ QUOTE ]
very good post duck: I agree that your line is a great one against a super aggressive and/or overplaying villain. But checking behind and calling a river bet or betting if checked to is a reasonable conservative alternative.

[/ QUOTE ]

By checking the turn the probability of the hero winning the hand on a bluff decreases immensely and if you are ahead there is a 5 to 10 % chance the villain will outdraw you. Against an opponent that aggressive you are obviously bluff calling flops slightly more and picking up pots with garbage on the turn every now and then. Against this type of opponent a check/call check/check induce bluff line should be used much less.

[fslexcduck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
very good post duck: I agree that your line is a great one against a super aggressive and/or overplaying villain. But checking behind and calling a river bet or betting if checked to is a reasonable conservative alternative.

[/ QUOTE ]

By checking the turn the probability of the hero winning the hand on a bluff decreases immensely and if you are ahead there is a 5 to 10 % chance the villain will outdraw you. Against an opponent that aggressive you are obviously bluff calling flops slightly more and picking up pots with garbage on the turn every now and then. Against this type of opponent a check/call check/check induce bluff line should be used much less.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is very true and definitely something to think about a lot.

generally, if this board were two tone, i would take this point with an even greater weight... meaning i would gladly bet/call this turn all day every day. given that the board was rainbow though, we can assume he is semibluffing less (very little detective work on this forum will show that the results in THIS hand prove otherwise, but that is irrelevant) and so this bet to induce a semibluff check raise all in and win a big pot against a draw isn't as great a line.