FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

First round at table so no reads.

Full Tilt Poker, $5/$10 Limit Hold'em Cash Game, 9 Players

Pre-Flop: K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] dealt to Hero (UTG+2)
2 folds, <font color="red">Hero raises</font>, 3 folds, <font color="red">BTN 3-bets</font>, 2 folds, Hero calls

Flop: (7.5 SB) J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero checks, <font color="red">BTN bets</font>, Hero calls

Turn: (4.75 BB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero checks, <font color="red">BTN bets</font>, Hero calls

River: (6.75 BB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero checks

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

I don't think I like this. I'd only forgo the preflop cap if the plan is to c/r the flop. Just cap preflop and go from there.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

can you explain your line a little?
pre, I assume no cap for deception purposes, but then you aren't putting in a raise later?
I might take this line against a v. aggro player who will always fire if checked to but shuts down when played back at; vs. unknown, standard for me is cap pre, lead flop, or call pre and c/r flop.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

We lose value by not capping pf.

On the flop, if we give him a range of TT+,AK, we are ahead of AK,QQ, which are 14 combos. We are behind AA,JJ,TT, which are 12 combos. Tied with KK.

Capping pf and taking the lead would make this easier to play. If we get raised we can then go into WA/WB mode.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

Why not cap HU against an unknown?


As played:

On the flop we are way ahead of QQ (6 combos), ahead AK (8) with 7 outs and ahead AQ (16 - should be discounted heavily) with 5 outs.

We are way behind AA (6 combos), JJ (3), TT (3).

Hmm. We are more often ahead. If ahead Villain might have a little less than 5 outs on average (QQ, AK, AQ). When we are behind we only have 2 outs. We are rather showdown bound here in any case.

I guess it boils down to how likely the villain is to fold a hand we beat (and that he is willing to bet for us) if we put a c/r in there somewhere? On the other hand we want to take this showdown and getting 3-bet by a better hand would be pretty expensive as we cannot fold to a 3-bet, can we?

On first look your flop and turn play looked bad. Now I'm beginning to think it's the opposite.

River is tricky again. Will TT, JJ fold here often if we donk or c/r? Maybe TT but not JJ? And will they bet if we check to them?

I guess river is too a c/c as TT will probably fold to c/r, gaining us nothing, but still sometimes bet if checked to. Against JJ and QQ we win that 1BB more with a c/r but lose 3 when AA 3-bets.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why not cap HU against an unknown?


As played:

On the flop we are way ahead of QQ (6 combos), ahead AK (8) with 7 outs and ahead AQ (16 - should be discounted heavily) with 5 outs.

We are way behind AA (6 combos), JJ (3), TT (3).

Hmm. We are more often ahead. If ahead Villain might have a little less than 5 outs on average (QQ, AK, AQ). When we are behind we only have 2 outs. We are rather showdown bound here in any case.

I guess it boils down to how likely the villain is to fold a hand we beat (and that he is willing to bet for us) if we put a c/r in there somewhere? On the other hand we want to take this showdown and getting 3-bet by a better hand would be pretty expensive as we cannot fold to a 3-bet, can we?

On first look your flop and turn play looked bad. Now I'm beginning to think it's the opposite.

River is tricky again. Will TT, JJ fold here often if we donk or c/r? Maybe TT but not JJ? And will they bet if we check to them?

I guess river is too a c/c as TT will probably fold to c/r, gaining us nothing, but still sometimes bet if checked to. Against JJ and QQ we win that 1BB more with a c/r but lose 3 when AA 3-bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

TT and JJ are not folding on the river (lol?). These hands still beat us. DUCY?

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

[ QUOTE ]
TT and JJ are not folding on the river (lol?). These hands still beat us. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

... aww... right.. I go crawl under my stone here.

So check-call river.

(DUCY = ?, I'm not a native English speaker nor very proficient at 2+2 lingo yet.)

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

DUCY = Do you see why?

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

I don't get it. Why aren't we capping and jamming the flop?

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

if i played it that way pf, i would probably bet/3bet the flop. or the turn. or the river.

i'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

I didn't cap preflop for deception purposes hoping it will lead to more bets going in postflop. Usually my intent is to checkraise the turn unless the flop falls in such a way that I feel villian might not bet the turn in which case I'll checkraise the flop or sometimes donk the turn.

This flop was was bad. If we assume villians range is TT+ and AK I'm actually a small dog here against his range.

The real problem with raising at some point is that I'm going to lose more when behind then make when I'm ahead. When villian has TT or JJ (and sometimes AA) I'm going to be 3bet or raised on the next street losing a total of around two bets more than when I just call down (not counting the times I spike a king). Being raised wouldn't be so bad if I could fold to a 3bet but I don't like that idea as villian could be overplaying QQ or semibluffing AK. When I'm ahead and villian has QQ we just gain only one additional bet unless he overplays his hand (again not counting times when he spikes a queen). Against AK we gain 0.8 bets or so because now now villian has a real chance of outdrawing us with a queen or an ace. As another poster pointed out there are a few more combinations of the hands that we beat than beat me uut not enough to make up for the extra bet I lose when behind.

Btw, if I had open raised from a later position I wouldn't take this line as it would be very possible that I was being isolated by hands such as KQ or AJ.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

Hmmm. That's interesting. I'm going to ruminate on it. I still think that you should cap pf, deception be damned. The only hand I would go and then stop pf like that is AA.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm. That's interesting. I'm going to ruminate on it. I still think that you should cap pf, deception be damned. The only hand I would go and then stop pf like that is AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only hands I ever do this with are AA and KK. It's a rather standard play though (not to say that it should be done all the time).

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

Yeah, I'm aware of the play. I just only do it with AA because I never want to have an overcard on the board freeze my plan or my action.

I think I did a poor job of explaining my POV.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

I think this play has merit but when we are OOP there are too many opportunities for a bet not to go in. We usually need an aggressive opponent and we don't know if Villain is aggressive or not.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think this play has merit but when we are OOP there are too many opportunities for a bet not to go in. We usually need an aggressive opponent and we don't know if Villain is aggressive or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Odds are fairly high that any random 5/10 online player is aggressive. But even ones that are more to the passive side put in bet with hands that they 3bet with preflop.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

We haven't considered much on what kind of a range the Villain puts the Hero?

A TAG image UTG+2 open-raise + call preflop and then just calling two broadway rainbow flop. -&gt; 99-JJ+?, ATs-AQs+? AJo-AKo? KQ(s)?

On the flop he'd probably muck 99 and c/r TT/JJ on the turn the latest, maybe put a bet or raise in with AJ at some point, and often keep calling with AT/AQ/AK/KQ.

There could be a small chance that the Villain would check AK on turn to induce a bluff on the river from AQ or KQs or that he'd just check behind with outs with those few times he has AQ. A check behind with AK on the river is also possible.

I don't know if it's big enough a chance to put in a donk or c/r somewhere.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

[ QUOTE ]
hands that they 3bet with preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's my experiencet that pretty often TAGs and LAGs and anyone else trying to play well tend to overplay on the button in these games.

if your range is including pp's as low as 77 or 88, and overcards as weak as ATs and AJo(and maybe worse) i think he shows up with a wider range than alot of people are giving credit for.

if he was 3betting from EP like UTG+2 or from the blinds i think we could narrow his range to TT+, AK. when he's on the button i'm widening his range to something like 99+, AJs+, AQo+ and i would probably throw KQs in.

it's conceivable he shows up with some random crap as low as 77 or as weak as JTs/KJs, etc. i wouldn't count on it(but it happens on occasion).

assuming this is true, that makes us close to a 64/36 fave and that means we need more bets to go in postflop.

Re: FTP 5/10: Very passively played KK
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hands that they 3bet with preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's my experiencet that pretty often TAGs and LAGs and anyone else trying to play well tend to overplay on the button in these games.

if your range is including pp's as low as 77 or 88, and overcards as weak as ATs and AJo(and maybe worse) i think he shows up with a wider range than alot of people are giving credit for.

if he was 3betting from EP like UTG+2 or from the blinds i think we could narrow his range to TT+, AK. when he's on the button i'm widening his range to something like 99+, AJs+, AQo+ and i would probably throw KQs in.

it's conceivable he shows up with some random crap as low as 77 or as weak as JTs/KJs, etc. i wouldn't count on it(but it happens on occasion).

assuming this is true, that makes us close to a 64/36 fave and that means we need more bets to go in postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I definately agree with the concept. However, I have not seem much isolation 3betting myself until the original raiser is opening in late-mid position. I do play most of my limit hold'em on Stars and I don't know if there are any Full Tilt specific tendencies.

Having said that villian in this hand had JTo. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]