KK UTG+2
 

Live tournament with a quite small buy-in. 7k startchips, 33 entries, 7k start chips, 4 prizes.

First period, maybe 10 minutes or so into the tournament and 32 of the 33 players are left in the tournament.

UTG is a pretty straightforward player, maybe a little on the loose side. UTG+1 is a solid cash game player that likes to see flops and have a good basic understanding for tournaments. If he called here his range woulda been very wide but sinse he 3-bet I think his range is pretty tight, something like AK, AQs+, TT+.

Hero has a pretty tight image in both Villians eyes, at least for the early stages of tournaments. I have not been involved in any pots yet in except completing from the SB two times in unraised pots and folded on the flop.

Stacks:
UTG: 6800
UTG+1: 7000
Hero: 6900

25/50, 8 players

Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
UTG raises to 150, UTG+1 raises to 400, Hero..?

Extra questions:

What do you prefer if the blinds and raises was the double ie.

Hypotetic:

50/100, 8 players

Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
UTG raises to 300, UTG+1 raises to 800, Hero..?

What if the blinds was 100/200 and UTG raises 600 and UTG+1 1600?

Same stack sizes in the two extra examples.

EDIT: Fixed title.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

put in another raise , first to 1750, second example shove

live players suck especially considering it is a relatively small buy in.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

live players suck but the def 3 bet wayyyy tighter, and its kk so rr again

Re: KK UTG+1
 

1) raising more than 1200 is a mistake here. I like raising to 1k. That would make the pot ~2500 on the flop and I dont think that UTG can call. One solid flop bet (1500-2k) and we are committed on the turn for a nice <PSB shove.
2) I make it 2400. Shove flop.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

no merits in calling in any of the three examples? not bec we are afraid of aces but bec getting action from other hands than aces since raising an UTG raiser and UTG+1 reraiser shows lots of strength.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

I'm obv way more likely to 4 bet example one than 3. I don't mind a call in 3.

Edit: thought example 3 was 2, didn't see the 2nd. This is what you get when you post/play halo at same time.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm obv way more likely to 4 bet example one than 2. I don't mind a call in 2.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'd think it should be the other way around.

in the first example if we 4-bet are we folding to a 5-bet? seems like the answer should be no, in which case we are making our hand look ridiculously strong w/ 100+bb stacks.

in the 2nd and more so 3rd example we are risking less and less and our hand naturally looks weaker(or at least people have to call less chips which will make their call ranges wider and our play better).

in the first example i'd be kind of surprised if we get action from qq(especially live) if we 4-bet it, in which case the play is imo to call and i don't think it's too close.

i'd call the first two almost for sure, and probably 4-bet the 3rd just cause calling is bordering on the % of effective stacks being too much where i no longer think the previous reasoning applies too much.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

Doesn't flat calling in option one let give a ton of people behind you very good odds to see the flop? That's my concern with example one.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't flat calling in option one let give a ton of people behind you very good odds to see the flop? That's my concern with example one.

[/ QUOTE ]
I kind of like the flat call, as cold 4-betting gives away your hand here. If it winds up 5-way, the pot is pretty big, so I would take my chances someone outflopped me.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't flat calling in option one let give a ton of people behind you very good odds to see the flop? That's my concern with example one.

[/ QUOTE ]

i suppose it does but i'm okay with that. i guess an argument could be made for 4-betting smallish(like 1050) to iso vs the 3-bettor w/ intentions to fold to a 5-bet w/o a read...but if i was gonna do that i'd wanna be pretty damn sure that guys aren't going to 5-bet ak or qq(i'm discounting bluffs). i also think this deep if a guy flat calls behind us and raises a cbet on most boards we don't flop a set on we can probably fold w/o a read.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
in the first example if we 4-bet are we folding to a 5-bet? seems like the answer should be no, in which case we are making our hand look ridiculously strong w/ 100+bb stacks.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is your 4-betting range {AA} here? or non-existent.

Re: KK UTG+2
 

Call, call, shove.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

example 1 depends on how competent 3-bettor is, if he's mucking QQ to a 4-bet we need to alter our line. however any villain that can potentially stack off with a worse hand you have to 4-bet to iso them.

ex. 2 I lean more towards a 22-2400 raise regardless of the villain

ex. 3 i'm not sure about, I think you almost want to try to get more than UTG+1 in the pot. flat call would work to maybe keep the utg player in the pot, but shoving is fine too.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in the first example if we 4-bet are we folding to a 5-bet? seems like the answer should be no, in which case we are making our hand look ridiculously strong w/ 100+bb stacks.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is your 4-betting range {AA} here? or non-existent.

[/ QUOTE ]

depends on opponents, but it's never {AA} against good ppl.

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky
 

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky
 

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't flat calling in option one let give a ton of people behind you very good odds to see the flop? That's my concern with example one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really care if five more people call, tbh. in fact, that might make our hand much easier to play, given the guy we're really worried about acts before we do.

Re: KK UTG+2
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think PF is not very interesting here. What I think is interesting is what do we do if UTG flat calls the raises as well in Ex's 1 and 2 and we see a flop of 227r


Edit: point being I think we are deep enough to get away from this hand in example one and maybe example 2 as well, not saying we are behind but AA is certainly a possibility and I don't think we should really be looking to automatically get all in here

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this but we're autostacking on a 722 flop, because donkament players are retarded and QQ never folds (online. I guess it does in a liveament sometimes but whatever.)

now, the form that this autostacking takes is gonna vary a lot because I'll happily just call down his 3 barrels sooo often.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in the first example if we 4-bet are we folding to a 5-bet? seems like the answer should be no, in which case we are making our hand look ridiculously strong w/ 100+bb stacks.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is your 4-betting range {AA} here? or non-existent.

[/ QUOTE ]

depends on opponents, but it's never {AA} against good ppl.

[/ QUOTE ]

thats my point. Wouldnt you rather 4-bet more hands than 0 hands in this spot? I mean what does our calling range look like here?

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in the first example if we 4-bet are we folding to a 5-bet? seems like the answer should be no, in which case we are making our hand look ridiculously strong w/ 100+bb stacks.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is your 4-betting range {AA} here? or non-existent.

[/ QUOTE ]

depends on opponents, but it's never {AA} against good ppl.

[/ QUOTE ]

thats my point. Wouldnt you rather 4-bet more hands than 0 hands in this spot? I mean what does our calling range look like here?

[/ QUOTE ]

unless you wanna start 4-betting light here(pretty uncommon spot and metagame is almost always irrelevant in tournaments anyway) nothing you do disguises your hand strength much. i'd rather call cause i think people are more likely to make mistakes post flop than preflop.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in the first example if we 4-bet are we folding to a 5-bet? seems like the answer should be no, in which case we are making our hand look ridiculously strong w/ 100+bb stacks.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is your 4-betting range {AA} here? or non-existent.

[/ QUOTE ]

depends on opponents, but it's never {AA} against good ppl.

[/ QUOTE ]

thats my point. Wouldnt you rather 4-bet more hands than 0 hands in this spot? I mean what does our calling range look like here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think people flat call too much when they should raise, but cold 4-betting here gives away too much information. Are you going to 4-bet with JJ or as a squeeze with a suited connector? I wouldn't 4-bet any hand here.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are you going to 4-bet with JJ or as a squeeze with a suited connector? I wouldn't 4-bet any hand here.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this tourn. in OP?..In hand 1 4-betting{AA-QQ, AK}.
I just wonder what our 3-bet calling range looks like here, taking this line. It seems that it is ~the same as a std 4-betting range; if only AA-KK is calling UTGs 4-bet, IMO.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you going to 4-bet with JJ or as a squeeze with a suited connector? I wouldn't 4-bet any hand here.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this tourn. in OP?..In hand 1 4-betting{AA-QQ, AK}.
I just wonder what our 3-bet calling range looks like here, taking this line. It seems that it is ~the same as a std 4-betting range; if only AA-KK is calling UTGs 4-bet, IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think 4-betting QQ or AK is a good play for OP. In fact, I don't know if I fold AK.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you going to 4-bet with JJ or as a squeeze with a suited connector? I wouldn't 4-bet any hand here.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this tourn. in OP?..In hand 1 4-betting{AA-QQ, AK}.
I just wonder what our 3-bet calling range looks like here, taking this line. It seems that it is ~the same as a std 4-betting range; if only AA-KK is calling UTGs 4-bet, IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think 4-betting QQ or AK is a good play for OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. whats his PrF calling range then, {AA-KK}?

What im getting at is; if 4-betting here gives away the strength of our hand too much; how does calling the 3-bet IP, conceal it? I dont know agree to disagree I guess, id prefer to 4-bet here.

Results
 

I just called, 2 ppl behind coldcalled the raises and UTG called as well.

flop came J64 with 2 hearts, UTG+1 bet 1300, I made it 4k, the other folded, he pushed with Ah Qh, I called and lost the flip.

I still think its close and that both plays have some merits both for the hand in a vacuum and for meta/balancing purposes. if it wasnt because it was UTG and UTG+1 (for exmple Hijack vs Button and I am in SB) and/or that UTG+1 is a pretty good hand reader that views me as tight early in torunament I think 4-betting is the best way to go.

comments on the hand are still welcome.

Re: Results
 

In example 1, you should 4-bet. If you just call, you are giving those yet to act too good a deal. Their M-cost-to-call=5.3 is low for M>90. Their implied odds given are about 18:1, sufficiently larger than the implied odds required for most hands (15:1 at most, especially considering likely 3:1 pot-odds).

In example 2, it is very close between calling and shoving. M-cost-to-call=5.3 but M=47. My feeling is that many players start really thinking hard when it costs 1/10 or more of their stack to call. Those yet to act are given implied odds of 8.75:1, not sufficient to play for set value, combo-draw value, etc.

Pot/stack ratio = 1250 / 6900 = 0.18, a nice win but perhaps not nice enough to justifying foregoing stacking villain post-flop. Personally, I shove, b/c I prefer small-ball. Note that non-shove 4-betting is bad b/c it costs 1/2 your stack if called, cramping you post-flop.

In example 3, you should shove. Pot/stack ratio = 2500/6900 = .36. This is an immediate payoff well worth eliminating flop risk.

Re: KK UTG+1
 

rr him and be prepared to GII