Bad laydown, how's my analysis of why?

[MRBAA]

Yes, I agree that this is really the key. When he has trip kings here, I'm really screwed because now I'm stuck calling $10 more on the river with aces up plus he's much likelier to fill and reraise me if I raise when I trip up. Given how bad my board was, I thought he'd have raised me earlier with split kings. But on the other hand this was a four-man game playing tight and when I came in raising (I acted before him on third) he may have decided to walk the dog.

Still, you have to give him trip kings about 30% of the time to make this break even and I think he has them less than that.

[Poker CPA]

I have been driving the betting against

"a loose bad but not clueless player"

How much more information do you need, Air?

Trying to clarify a statement that adds nothing to the debate is funny.

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been driving the betting against

"a loose bad but not clueless player"

How much more information do you need, Air?

Trying to clarify a statement that adds nothing to the debate is funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you always insist on insulting everyone on this board? Does it make you feel more adequate about yourself? You know there is a Psychology board too if you need to address any issues you have with yourself.

Once more, these were general comments. I'm sorry if my posts don't meet up to your high intellectual standards. The original poster asked for input on how we would have played it & I chimed in. It's simple as that!

[MRBAA]

Poker CPA -- I'm asking you as nicely as possible to please not post into this thread (or any of the topics I start). I'm sure you have some good ideas to share, but I'm just not getting anything out of your posts. Thanks.

[PoorLawyer]

I certainly am not thinking that way during the hand, but it is interesting analysis after the fact. The big problem I have with it is that they are kind of made up numbers, since we are just guessing at what he has percentage wise and how he will play them.

If you are saying in the OP that you only think he has trip kings 10% of the time then I think its a call. This number could be reasonable as I would think you would see more action earlier in the hand against your junk board if he had kings. You are getting 6 to 1 to on your money and will improve 30% of the time or so. Most of the time when you improve you will win, given your paramaters (only lose the 10% when he has KKK and you don't get AAA and times when he fills IF he has 2 pair now).

If you are sure he doesnt have air you can probably check/fold the river if you don't improve, unless you think there is more than a 20ish% chance he started on a draw and just has the kings (tough to tell without having info on the boards showing).

If you really think the odds of KKK are that small, then you can try to raise 6th for the free showdown...that is risky though in case he 3 bets. I would rather get to see my last card I think instead of paying the same and having to fold 6th anyway.

[Beavis68]

how did you arrive at the 10% figure? That seems really low.

[MRBAA]

Yeah, it could be low. It's just my guess based on knowing this player (we play on the commuter train an average of 3 nights a week). Normally he'd get aggressive with his kings earlier, but this was a tight 4-man game and he may have decided to slow play, especially since my board looked like crap and he probably put me on a low pair.

[RandomUser]

How was the betting on 3rd street?

If you completed and he merely called, I'd put him on a pocket pair hoping to hit his King kicker (with a small chance of slowing playing split kings)

In that case, I call 6th basically 100% of the time and fold 7th if I don't hit my 2nd pair.

If he raised and you reraised, I'd fold 6th street nearly 100% of the time since I'm expecting to see 3 Ks.

[MRBAA]

I made it $3 to go on 3rd, he was the only caller (4 man game). Normally he might pop it with kings in a full game, but this was a short game, very tight and he may have decided to slow play his kings.