NL100 - Odd PF Reraise

[retep]

But if the flop has an A in it and you fold, you are sometiems folding the best hand.

Also, as far is pre flop is concerned, if we raise and he re raises, cant we just fold knowingly that we did not have the best hand?

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]

by raising here we are effectively bluffing w/ KK preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

A bluff is a bet made to fold a stronger hand. Since KK will never get a stronger hand to fold pf, the notion of a pf bluff with KK is fundamentally flawed.

[CLB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

the first half of your post should not lead you to the second half unless you arent grasping some fundamental concepts of NL cash games

[/ QUOTE ]

at the risk of sounding stupid - can you expand on this

thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

by raising here we are effectively bluffing w/ KK preflop. When villain is ahead here we have 2 outs, and when we are ahead he has at most 3 outs. By calling we keep the hands in his range that we beat in the pot and leave him with the initiative to put even more money in the pot with those hands. By raising again we guarantee ourselves action from the part of his range that crushes us and we let him get away from every hand that we beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like this line. You need to play EXTREMELY well post flop in order to play it like this profitably.

Assume you just call. And assume that the board is really dry are you calling down here..

if he bets half pot on every street?
2/3 pot?
3/4 pot?
full pot?

By just calling him, you are creating an unnecessary difficult decision for yourself throughout the hand. Especially considering that you have no ideas what villains range here. It could be JJ+ AK+, but it could also be anypair or SC.

If you are a very good post flop player i would like your line. I would even like your line if our hand was TT or JJ.

Also KK only loses to 1 hand in his range, so how are we bluffing if we raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are right that another raise makes this hand EASIER to play, but the point is that it also makes the hand LESS PROFITABLE to play IF you give him a range of AK, JJ+. You will make more money just calling than by raising.

Say he's got AA:

If you raise, you'll likely wind up all-in with 2 outs. If he's got AA and you call, most flops (the ones with no A) will result in you probably winding up all-in anyway (the pot is big preflop, you'll probably be all-in by the turn), again with only 2 outs. Maybe the board is awful and he slows down, saving you some money. Maybe he hits a third A and you get out cheap, again saving yourself some money. Those cases will be rare.

Say he's got JJ, QQ, AK:

If you raise you will probably get a fold from one of these hands, unless he's shortstacked or just not that bright. Sometimes you'll get it all-in as a huge favorite (2-3 outs for him), but more often than not you'll push him out of the pot (unless you break out a super lame min raise). Sure, you take down a decent pot preflop but if you'd taken a little bit of risk it could have been a much bigger pot. If you call, he's betting any flop with all of the hands in his range. If no A flops then you're going to be ahead the vast majority of the time. You'll almost always win an extra bet, and since the pot is so big preflop it will be a big bet. If the board is pretty dry then just call him down the whole way, if it's a scary board then raise the flop. You'll end up losing a few of these but you'll still come out ahead (and it won't be close) in the long run. The added difficulty in playing the hand postflop is definitely worth the added $$$ you get by playing it this way.

Again, all of this assumes that you're really thinking JJ, QQ, AK, are a big part of his range.

[retep]

I don't think we are on the same page here.

To all who are saying if you end up all in pre-flop you have 2 out, that should be obvious. However, that situation is totally avoidable. Why do you need to get it all in pre-flop? Considering that both hero and villain are 200BB deep, that is foolish spew.

Then there are the people who advocate, "well if there is no A on the flop you can feel comfortable about your hand"

NO YOU CANT. I keep hearing that type of thinking in similar threads and it is so wrong.

The fact of the matter is you cant call down here profitably. and the money from winning the pot outright preflop is more important than trying to get him to "bluff" 3 streets into our KK, and part of the reason why is because we cannot narrow his range down to JJ+ AK as most people have in this thread.

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think we are on the same page here.

To all who are saying if you end up all in pre-flop you have 2 out, that should be obvious. However, that situation is totally avoidable. Why do you need to get it all in pre-flop? Considering that both hero and villain are 200BB deep, that is foolish spew.

Then there are the people who advocate, "well if there is no A on the flop you can feel comfortable about your hand"

NO YOU CANT. I keep hearing that type of thinking in similar threads and it is so wrong.

The fact of the matter is you cant call down here profitably. and the money from winning the pot outright preflop is more important than trying to get him to "bluff" 3 streets into our KK, and part of the reason why is because we cannot narrow his range down to JJ+ AK as most people have in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

umm think what you want but any time you are raise/folding KK preflop you can make the same play every bit as profitably w/ 72o. Do you expect someone who wont put any money in w/ JJ/QQ as an overpair in a 3-bet pot to do it in a 4-bet pot? Also if his range is wide as you say then raising is even worse with KK as it only eliminates more hands we are ahead of. We can always check turn and value-bet river if he slows down after his flop c-bet. Pot control is not illegal in RR pots.

[Jurrr]

Futuredoc, I see what you are saying and respect your opinion. Does it basically mean we don't 4bet any hands preflop at all?

As if we 4bet KK- for value we only fold out hands we're ahead of. But 4betting only AA is pretty bad from a hand disguise perspective.

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
Futuredoc, I see what you are saying and respect your opinion. Does it basically mean we don't 4bet any hands preflop at all?

As if we 4bet KK- for value we only fold out hands we're ahead of. But 4betting only AA is pretty bad from a hand disguise perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]

I generally will 4-bet every now and then, but its usually because a) someone is a total donk who will get it all in pre w/ JJ/AQ type hands but will fold the flop if he misses or overcards hit, or b) i am deep stacked, OOP, and respect my opponent to the point that i feel like they will not let me play KK/QQ/AK profitably out of position, but i am also 4-betting AA and random bluffs in spots like that.

[Jurrr]

But your default line with QQ+/AK is to simply call the villain's 3bet, even if OOP if only 100BB deep?

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
But your default line with QQ+/AK is to simply call the villain's 3bet, even if OOP if only 100BB deep?

[/ QUOTE ]

vs some i fold AK, vs a few i will fold QQ, but against those people ill usually call w/ some small pairs depending on 3-bet size since if i cant continue w/ AK/QQ i can set mine profitably vs their range

[Augie]

Glad to see this hand is getting discussion. I posted it because NL cash plays so differently from the games I usually play - SNGs and MTTs.

In an MTT, limping with AA after limpers, at an aggressive table (where guys in position and in the blinds like to 'punish the limpers' with a big raise and a somewhat wide range), is a known play. At the right table, this makes the limpalong with AA a valid play.

In NL cash, I think the situation is different, but I could be wrong, and I don't have as much time at these tables.

At first, the reraise confused me. Then I realized what (I think, perhaps others can confirm/deny) was really happening - he had a medium strength hand, the kind you would sometimes raise after limpers, but also sometimes just limp along - something like TT,99,AQs, and even AK sometimes. And he was not giving me credit for a big hand. (That is what I thought at the time - anyone disagree?)

I didn't think QQ or JJ was really in his range. AA seemed like a remote possiblility: possible, but remote.

So, what do you think of my analysis of his range? Honestly, the real reason I posted this hand was to see if I'm thinking correctly about ranges.

Crib notes on what I think his range is - medium pair such as 88/99/TT, big suited Aces like AQs/AJs, AK (though less likely than the other hands), and yes, AA (least likely to be in his range, IMO).

So, given what I put him on, and our stack sizes, I decided to just call, with the plan of almost always raising his inevitable flop bet (unless an A, or otherwise crazy 8,9,T suited type flop came).

I call. Flop comes down A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].

Villain bets $25 on the flop with $47 (after rake) already in the pot. Now what?

And is my original plan valid? If the flop had been J66, what is your play?

Be good,

Augie