PAHWM: $300 tourney w/KK (3 Viewers)

[Legend5555]

Per the OP, I am an the effective stack in this hand and I am covered by villain.

 

[Frogzilla]

Small bet gets called probably 80% of the time given the flop action, and a very small percentage of the time we are losing to 99 or AA if it's a shove over the top and so we are calling any shove.

Large bet probably only gets called 25% of the time and by a much higher percentage of those two hands above.

Risk weighted, I agree it's small size for sure.

I have a much different assumption/experience with respond-to-bet-size elasticity in these kinds of tournaments. But even assuming that really high elasticity, 80% of 15 bb is 12bb and 25% of 41 bb is 10bb…its kinda close.

 

[MrCatPants]

I have a much different assumption/experience with respond-to-bet-size elasticity in these kinds of tournaments. But even assuming that really high elasticity, 80% of 15 bb is 12bb and 25% of 41 bb is 10bb…its kinda close.

we lose a higher percentage of the calls on #2 though - so would have to discount both numbers by like 5 or 7% points. hard to model out the times we get raised by a worse hand on the first option

 

[BKisback]

I'd bet something like a third to a half of the villain's remaining stack. Whatever leaves him with enough to shove selectively for an orbit so that he feels like he has to call.

How did this play out?

 

[Legend5555]

Conclusion

Effective stack: 56bb (Hero).

Folds to MP, who limps.
Hero in LJ next to act raises to 3.33bb with KK (suits irrelevant).
Button looks interested, grabs chips to 3 bet, then ends up tossing in a one chip call.
MP calls.

Pot: 12.5bb
Eff stack: 52.66bb

Flop:

MP checks.
Hero bets 3.33bb
Button raises to 10.83bb
MP folds.
HERO calls.

Pot: 34.17bb
Eff stack: 41.83bb

Turn:

HERO thinks and decides to check in flow.
Button checks back.

Pot: 34.17bb
Eff stack: 41.83bb

River:

HERO bets 12.5bb.
Villain takes a minute and jams.
HERO sigh calls.

Get your guesses in.

 

[krafticus]

Villain has AJ?

 

[shorticus]

Okay, something out of left field here. Reading this entire thread and it’s just a hunch, but is this QTs? I don’t know why this hand is stuck in my head, but it feels like that’s that it is.

I say that acknowledging that his flop raise may have been an error.

I can be completely off here, but it’s just instinctual.

 

[doughboy63]

Not by the way it was played, but it is so unlikely he has quads, could be shoving with so many hand we beat. A9 is my guess.

 

[DrStrange]

Could have been trapping with JJ all the way.

Considers 3-betting preflop but decides to see a flop in position

Flop: Raises Hero's c-bet, trying to get extra from Hero if he has a hand of some sort.

Turn: Villain is still way ahead in his mind - check/check letting Hero "catch up"

River: Hero bets, villain tries to close his trap.

Let's note pocket nines might play the same way, though the flop raise might well become a trap-call instead. Jacks full is 3x more likely than quads.

The path for villain to have pocket aces is too twisted for me to speculate on. Could be so, but it would be a surprise I think

DrStrange

 

[Kentucky]

I’m on team A9ss.
Pre-flop V is pondering if Hero is squeezing light over the limp.
Raise on the flop for value, check back on the turn after the board has straightened.

FWIW, I think we have to sigh call. We beat too much value still, even if we don’t have the stone cold nuts.

 

[Kain8]

No player should be raising flopped quads or a flopped overfull because you have virtually all the cards locked up and remove all the bluffing action that your opponent(s) can do in a hand.

Additionally, what player doesn't 3 bet preflop on the button with Aces? It's the dream spot through and through for a thinking player to 4 bet bluff you thinking you're just trying to out muscle the original raise.

I'm honestly stumped because this villain's actions has, in one way or another, flown in the face of two Hold'em paradigms at the same time without knowing what his actual hand is. Basically a Schrodinger's cat of a poker hand for me.

I'll go with Aces full for the villain despite how bizarre it is.

 

[chippitydoodah]

I believe he has a monster. 99 or AA.

 

[Legend5555]

Villain ended up having the non-3 bet pre AA.

 

[Kain8]

Villain ended up having the non-3 bet pre AA.

That's the "least painful" hand for him to have. If he 3-bets preflop, all the chips are going in anyway.

 

[MrCatPants]

That's the "least painful" hand for him to have. If he 3-bets preflop, all the chips are going in anyway.

In all timelines this hand ends up the same.

 

[shorticus]

The hardest thing to account for in poker is other players mistakes.

 

[Legend5555]

I find this hand interesting because of the dynamic his 3 bet balk brings into it.

When he raises flop, I essentially think he can't have 99 (is probably not even a for sure 3 bet pre anyway), and is very unlikely to have JJ. He also can't have AK or TT because that makes no sense to raise on flop with some still left to act behind that can have a 9. So, if we take his faux 3 bet seriously, what can he have? Basically QQ and AA, and occasionally JJ.

On the turn, I seriously contemplated leading small because it's a terrible card for his perceived range and good for mine. Not good in the sense that my AK gets there, because I don't have AK calling the raise OOP on flop. And I expect him to check this back a lot with both QQ and AA. But I decided to just play in flow, not knowing too much about his game. I assumed JJ and AA would often just bet again unless he was a really thinking player.

From his POV, what do I have? When I bet call the flop, the worst thing I have may be QJs, KJs, AJs. I can definitely have some 9s like 98s, T9s, J9s, A9s. But also 99 & JJ-AA. I probably won't have TT as that too heavily blocks the bluffs I want him to have, and I may not always bet that on the flop after seeing his 3 bet balk pre.

With all that in mind, does AA want to bet a K turn after I call? I can't call another bet with a single pair very easily. So what does AA get value from? Now if he has JJ, does that want to bet again? I think most often yes since now it's less likely I have J and more likely I have a 9.

This is what made the river so disgusting for me. I know he wanted to 3 bet. 1 of those hands got there on the river, the other 2 (99 and JJ) would rarely play like this.

As crazy as it is, I think my bet on the river may have been a mistake. I'm basically just targeting QQ to call, which in this board seems silly. If he has AA or 99, he's likely going to jam, or close to it is I check. And if he somehow has JJ, he probably bets after seeing me now check twice.

Not that I'm necessarily looking to make a hero check fold with the 3rd nuts, but I didn't even give myself the option. Once I bet and he jams I'm getting too good a price. It's always value from him. 4 combos beat, 3 combos don't. And those 3 he may not have in full given the post flop action. But I'm getting 3 to 1.

 

[MrCatPants]

I find this hand interesting because of the dynamic his 3 bet balk brings into it.

When he raises flop, I essentially think he can't have 99 (is probably not even a for sure 3 bet pre anyway), and is very unlikely to have JJ. He also can't have AK or TT because that makes no sense to raise on flop with some still left to act behind that can have a 9. So, if we take his faux 3 bet seriously, what can he have? Basically QQ and AA, and occasionally JJ.

On the turn, I seriously contemplated leading small because it's a terrible card for his perceived range and good for mine. Not good in the sense that my AK gets there, because I don't have AK calling the raise OOP on flop. And I expect him to check this back a lot with both QQ and AA. But I decided to just play in flow, not knowing too much about his game. I assumed JJ and AA would often just bet again unless he was a really thinking player.

From his POV, what do I have? When I bet call the flop, the worst thing I have may be QJs, KJs, AJs. I can definitely have some 9s like 98s, T9s, J9s, A9s. But also 99 & JJ-AA. I probably won't have TT as that too heavily blocks the bluffs I want him to have, and I may not always bet that on the flop after seeing his 3 bet balk pre.

With all that in mind, does AA want to bet a K turn after I call? I can't call another bet with a single pair very easily. So what does AA get value from? Now if he has JJ, does that want to bet again? I think most often yes since now it's less likely I have J and more likely I have a 9.

This is what made the river so disgusting for me. I know he wanted to 3 bet. 1 of those hands got there on the river, the other 2 (99 and JJ) would rarely play like this.

As crazy as it is, I think my bet on the river may have been a mistake. I'm basically just targeting QQ to call, which in this board seems silly. If he has AA or 99, he's likely going to jam, or close to it is I check. And if he somehow has JJ, he probably bets after seeing me now check twice.

Not that I'm necessarily looking to make a hero check fold with the 3rd nuts, but I didn't even give myself the option. Once I bet and he jams I'm getting too good a price. It's always value from him. 4 combos beat, 3 combos don't. And those 3 he may not have in full given the post flop action. But I'm getting 3 to 1.

(with love, not criticism) Personally I think you are overthinking this. JJ and A9 and J9s and K9s and Q10s (and even potentially 98s and Q9s) have more combos than 99 and AA and would likely play very similarly. Sometimes you just get coolered. You win here way more often than you lose with this line.

 

[Legend5555]

(with love, not criticism) Personally I think you are overthinking this. JJ and A9 and J9s and K9s and Q10s (and even potentially 98s and Q9s) have more combos than 99 and AA and would likely play very similarly. Sometimes you just get coolered. You win here way more often than you lose with this line.

He won't have 89, J9, K9, QT, or A9 He wanted to 3 bet pre. These aren't pros.

 

[MrCatPants]

He won't have 89, J9, K9, QT, or A9 He wanted to 3 bet pre. These aren't pros.

Maybe GA is different, but in TX recs are three betting these types of hands on the semi-regular in position. Even against UTG opens.

 

[Kentucky]

He won't have 89, J9, K9, QT, or A9 He wanted to 3 bet pre. These aren't pros.

I could see a thinking V considering 3-betting light if he thinks you are iso-ing light against a limp. Maybe it was a more obvious “3-bet for value, nah I want make sure I get a call” move in real life.

Interesting hand. Thanks for sharing.

 

[ToTheMax]

Based on the additional commentary, one vote for AA. That said, I think any villains (thinking or not) range has to be wider than AA or 99.

Either way, the turn is a bet for me 100% of the time. I understand the logic for a check, and obviously love getting a chance to CRAI, but I think it lets villain off too easy. Also, think missing a bet on the turn ensures for an easier decision on river for villain.

 

[Legend5555]

Maybe GA is different, but in TX recs are three betting these types of hands on the semi-regular in position. Even against UTG opens.

Keep in mind, there are no legal card rooms anywhere here. All games are underground. The community that plays these tournaments is small. These get no more than 30 players, total of maybe 55 entries. Players here are more on the loose passive side than the loose aggressive side. During the first 4 hours at my table, we maybe saw 6-8 total 3 bets. 3 of which were from OMCs that showed their big pairs. We saw dozens of 4-6 way single raised and limped pots.

That's not to say there aren't players that will do what you are saying. But that is not the norm here. The people that do it stick out like a sore thumb.