#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
k9 and k5s are not out of question but mini rai seems like 55 yuk
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
I like a raise pre most of the time.
Flop looks good, as for the turn, it's tough. I'm obv not folding. I'm tempted to say get it in since some bad players (and there are plenty in 50 FO) will play KJ/KT here like it's the nuts, but man this guy's line really does look like a set. I def don't hate call/call. I also couldn't fault a river fold, esp if he limps behind AK and often gets scared. Tough spot Sherman, if he has K5s/K9o/K9s in his range i kinda want to get it in on turn. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
Thanks Bond.
Ok. Here is why I am posting this hand. After I bet the turn (and before villain raised believe it or not) I realized I should NOT have bet the turn. I fell into a trap of "OMG I have top two, I have to bet". But there is ZERO reason to bet the turn IMO. The board is NOT drawy. That means it is unlikely villain is on a draw and I don't mind giving a free card. While the turn did give me top two pair, it did NOT improve my hand against villains range. If he has a worse K, I was already ahead. If he had a set, I was already behind. What's more is that if he has a worse K, I am probably NOT getting two streets of value. That is, I can either bet the turn or the river against him for value, but it is very unlikely that I can bet both and expect to get called by a worse hand. So, I should have CHECKED the turn. Both because I am either WA/WB and because I only have 1 street of value if I am ahead and checking the turn gets me that value on the river. Also, I am very certain the river bet is a fold. A PSB on the river (that is nearly A/I) is a very strong indicator that I am beat (or tied with KQ). That is it. No other hand takes this line. Also, Baluga's theorem says that TPTK is beat on the turn if villain called on the flop and raises. My hand is essentially TPTK because there are no two pair hands that he has that take this line. The river is a trivially easy fold IMO. So by betting the turn, I made a -EV play, but I fell into the trap of "OMG I have top two." There was no reason to bet the turn. Anyhow, for those interested in results, I am total fish and called the river even though I should have folded. Villain showed 55 for a set. Thanks all for your input. Sherman |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
yeah 55 seemed logical. yes sherm you bring up great points. i get criticized on here at times for passive play when stacks are deep enough and im in a wa /wb situation.but once u get action and they are flat calling you as cloutier says you BETTER SHUT IT DOWN
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
Very interesting hand. I think you analysis is right on here. One ? Would you have played this hand differently had it not been so early?
I find myself, in the first couple of rounds, making similar mistakes because I'm assuming every player I'm up against is a donk. Based on the numerous threads on playing aggressively early is the move in this spot -EV because of the increased chance you are up against a player who is totally clueless and has a range that is wider than you'd expect? Just a thought...although based on this specific board...55 looked more and more likely on every street. Thanks for sharing....this was a very good post...as usual for you. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
I like a lot of your analysis sherman, but I think K9 would take this line (on the turn at least.) Also, if you c/c the turn, which seems reasonable, you're pretty much forced to c/c the river too. So, if we can find a fold on the river taking your original line, I'm not so sure it's inferior. If we're paying off a set on the river even after bet/calling the turn then I agree that a c/c on the turn is the way to go. However, I don't think anyone can successfully argue that we could c/c the turn then c/f the river here, villain's range would just be too wide.
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
I don't agree it's -EV to bet the turn, you have no reason yet (i.e. before he raises) to believe that villian has exactly a set, he could easily have KJ/KT in which case he has outs for a straight, and people show up with other 2 pair combo's here too.
Betting turn is fine and the correct play IMO, unless you have some solid reads on villian. Once he raises, then fine, call the raise and revaluate on the river. FWIW I think the river is a fold, unless you know villian is a huge spewmonkey, but then obv I've seen results so maybe my view on river is kinda biased. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
Thanks Sherman . . . very interesting hand.
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS $50 KQ flops TP in limped pot, non-drawy flop; action on the tu
This is like the best hand I've seen in 4 weeks for a block bet on the river (based on how you played it). Because, when you call the turn, you're going to be left with such a close decision on the river that whether you c/f or c/c could come down to whether your cat is sleeping next to your computer as opposed to down the hall.
As far as your play on the turn is concerned, I agree that it's a close decision. My recent analysis of this sucked, so let me try to make it a little clearer. If you check, what is your plan for the rest of the hand. You are trying for pot control, right? So, villain bets once, call. If villain bets again, call. Fair enough, I think this is the superior play here. I'm not sure how many players can pull it off. it's a tourney, it's top two, and online players are odd ducks. Barry |
|
|