Profession NL HE example

[tolbiny]

On page 135 in the REM section of PNL the example of KT on a K 4 4 board is called a way ahead/ way behind scenario which is used as justification to check behind on the flop and call a potential bluffer on the turn and river. The authors however don't mention the fact that any weaker king has ~10.5 outs against you with 15 outs to chop and 3 outs to win (k2 and k3 only have chop outs).

[Nielsio]

The suckout odds don't matter much because they're never folding their TP anyway (ie. this is a showdown hand, not a drawing hand).

[Nielsio]

So you wanna go for some pot control and inducing some bluffs is a bonus. You're not getting called by anything you beat if you start firing hard.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
The suckout odds don't matter much because they're never folding their TP anyway (ie. this is a showdown hand, not a drawing hand).

[/ QUOTE ]

?

[Mossberg]

another thing to consider is that (depending on the villain and the action), we can often count out alot of worse kings anyways. Say we open from CO with KTs, and a 25/10 villain calls in the sb - now if he does have a king here, it's usually going to be a better king, since he's probably not playing stuff like K6 pf.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The suckout odds don't matter much because they're never folding their TP anyway (ie. this is a showdown hand, not a drawing hand).

[/ QUOTE ]

?

[/ QUOTE ]


I think it helps if we get an actual HH, positions, reads/stats, etc.

[Suwalski]

Might be a bit OT, but aren't they limping awfully lot in general in their hand examples in that book?

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
another thing to consider is that (depending on the villain and the action), we can often count out alot of worse kings anyways. Say we open from CO with KTs, and a 25/10 villain calls in the sb - now if he does have a king here, it's usually going to be a better king, since he's probably not playing stuff like K6 pf.

[/ QUOTE ]

The opponents in the example are a loose limper and the BB.

Nielso-
its not so much that they will fold their TP, its trying to extract value from it when you are ahead. Both bigger and smaller kings are likely to put in bets on the turn given that the flop is checked around, but smaller kings less likely to put in bets on the flop (as they are more likely to check).

[tolbiny]

For those who don't have the book-

the example is a 1-2$ game with 200 Effective stacks. Very loose player limps in Middle position and you limp with KhTh on the button. sb folds, BB checks (bb likes to bluff and pays off with mediocre hands) . Flop is K 4 4r and the flop is checked to you.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
another thing to consider is that (depending on the villain and the action), we can often count out alot of worse kings anyways. Say we open from CO with KTs, and a 25/10 villain calls in the sb - now if he does have a king here, it's usually going to be a better king, since he's probably not playing stuff like K6 pf.

[/ QUOTE ]

The opponents in the example are a loose limper and the BB.

Nielso-
its not so much that they will fold their TP, its trying to extract value from it when you are ahead. Both bigger and smaller kings are likely to put in bets on the turn given that the flop is checked around, but smaller kings less likely to put in bets on the flop (as they are more likely to check).

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't have the book, I commented on the holdings/ranges and the board. If you can turn it into a HH that would help.