BB KK into a 3 way flop.. grumble!

[Boggy Depot]

Bet the flop. Someone correct me if this is not correct but with four other callers in the pot there is a only a 50% chance that someone has an Ace. That means that half the time you have the best hand and a fair percentage of the time the person with the Ace will have an iffy kicker. At these limits some people will cold-call with A-rag suited so maybe a bet will get them to make "the smart laydown". You showed strength pre-flop so take a shot. Call a single raise (fold to a reraise) then check-fold if you don't hit on the turn. Don't be afraid to lose a bet here and there. Poker's just like work - you have to spend money to make money. But don't get foolish.

[RemyXO]

BEFORE READING THE POSTS:
WTF is up with the flop check???

AFTER READING THE POSTS:
WFT is up with the flop check???

[VirgilStarkwell]

grunch
without reads how can you put UTG+1 on an A?

BET FLOP, call a raise, and re evaluate on turn.

That being said, folding KK on the flop, you are a better man than I sir.

[martybonus]

:grunch:

I dunno actually. He called your 3-bet preflop but didn't cap. He's OOP so you can bet he's on a strong hand but he'd have capped if he was on AA. Seems to me he's probably on AK or AQs

So yeah, you probably were right to fold this. I mean, what would an UTG+1 call a 3bet with except Ace big?

sucks.

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
I mean, what would an UTG+1 call a 3bet with except Ace big?

[/ QUOTE ]

Any hand he raised with. Which is quite a bit: TT+ AJs+ KQ
If he's loose, he might raise with a lot more. Don't assume them to play like you ('cause they don't) - that applies to many of your posts. You often say something like "Yeah, good fold - he must have a higher x - how could he play the way he did otherwise?" Well, exactly THIS is something you DON'T have to worry about. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[martybonus]

[ QUOTE ]


Well, exactly THIS is something you DON'T have to worry about. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

not entirely sure what you mean. do you mean we don't have to worry about the players who play roughly 'like we do' (i.e., sensibly) ? so then the issue is what is crazy fish playing?

i find it difficult to account for entirely wonky players. i mean, when i read these posts and grunch them, i can only assume villain is not a total fish, raising pre-flop with 72os. I spose I assume players are sensible and then think of the a) the hands we fear and b) the liklihood of those hands given their play in that hand.

I guess that when I grunch I think about what 'reasonable' hands the villain might have and how hero should play the specific situation. of course it's always possible the villain is a maniac but surely the most sensible way to grunch is to assume a reasonable level of play? there's no defense from maniac suck-outs anyway...

[fretelöo]

No, we don't have to worry about trying to understand how someone comes to the realization that he should raise his 72o preflop. They just do sometimes.
That fact, that they do raise it sometimes, we should incorporate in our assessment of the situation. Of course, a raise often means a strong hand, but not every time - not nearly as often as lines like

[ QUOTE ]
He's OOP so you can bet he's on a strong hand but he'd have capped if he was on AA. Seems to me he's probably on AK or AQs [...]So yeah, you probably were right to fold this. I mean, what would an UTG+1 call a 3bet with except Ace big?

[/ QUOTE ]

insinuate. Don't assume too much.

We don't know that he would have capped AA, in fact, many fish don't because they don't want to "loose customers", they don't "want to give their hand away" and whatever other crazyness crossses their mind.
We can guess villains likely range and try going from there. "Villain must have ... otherwise he would have ..." will definitely loose you money. Money you could have won and money you shouldn't have lost.

Of course you should think about what reasonable hands villain might hold - that's the whole point - but there's a huge area of grey between "reasonable level of play" and "villain is a maniac". It just seemed to me that you kind of "fluctuate" between two extrema: In that n00b-post, you start with how fishy our opponents are, and now you assume every raise to mean AA... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[martybonus]

fair point, cheers [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[22pajo]

Grunch:
Lead the flop and this hand plays differently. If villain raises and you get a cold caller or 2 you may get sufficient pot odds to draw to your likely 2 outer. If you dont then its an easy fold.

[Matt Ruff]

Bet the flop. The pot is large, you might have the best hand, and even if you don't, the guy who cold-called preflop with A3o doesn't know that; give him a chance to fold.