PAHWM - AK oop (1 Viewer)

[Eriks]

I’m pretty sure he’s not the kind of player to raise TP on the flop, especially into multiple opponents, but I can’t say for certain. That leaves sets, possibly 43s and A2s/A5s/65s, and imo, one should never completely rule out total randomness/weird tilt air, although again, unlikely into multiple opponents. I would have loved to see his hand but it went into the muck before I could even start pleading.

 

[upNdown]

You should consider it. There is no cap on what you can bet relative to the pot, and if you KNOW you are going to get called, bigger is always better.

If you know you’re getting called, sure. But my point is, in my experience, when a guy bets 200 (when there’s 130 in the pot,) in a no limit game, he’s usually NOT getting called, except by the nuts or something close to it. And most people want a call when they flop a set.

 

[Eriks]

Actually, I would have EXACTLY put him on a worse K when he checked back river. I think you missed value here on the river. As you stated on the flop analysis...the obvious raising hands (sets, flopped two pairs) are actually TOO obvious, and most would raise the turn when the pot is bigger. The scary Q on the turn....in the case if he had KQ, NO WAY a decent player checks this back. What does this leave besides a steamy attempt at a bluff? Kx. Which would call a small to medium bet.

IF he happens to raise, comfortably fold.

In a vacuum the quick checkback on the river actually looks more like Kx than 65 or air. With air or even 65 he should realize they’re no good and at least pause to consider turning it into a bluff. But he was kinda fed up at turning up short every hand and maybe he just gave up. I think the flop and turn play suggests he did not have Kx

 

[Legend5555]

I was replying to your earlier post where you said the obvious raises were 33, 44, etc. When I see the guy reraise 200, I’m thinking it’s not a set.
It’s possibly two pair, or a semi bluff with A2 or 56, as you also suggested.
(But neither 2 pair nor 56 make much sense to me either - what’s the best guy at the table doing, flatting with those holdings at UTG1?)

Given how deep they are, I actually think raising a set has merit on this board assuming you think you can get 3 streets against AK. You just have to make sure you also have bluffs you are going to go crazy with too.

When you start getting 300-400+BBs deep, you have to start building pots sooner. Which is why you see a lot of live cash game players 3-bet in position with pretty much anything they are going to play.

Actually, I would have EXACTLY put him on a worse K when he checked back river. I think you missed value here on the river. As you stated on the flop analysis...the obvious raising hands (sets, flopped two pairs) are actually TOO obvious, and most would raise the turn when the pot is bigger. The scary Q on the turn....in the case if he had KQ, NO WAY a decent player checks this back. What does this leave besides a steamy attempt at a bluff? Kx. Which would call a small to medium bet.

IF he happens to raise, comfortably fold.

Maybe at some frequency. But how often is a decent player calling a UTG raise from +1 going to:

1. Have KQ, KJ, KT?
2. Raise it against a c-bet into 3 people with 2 people still to act behind?

I'm not saying it's not possible, just that it seems unlikely enough that I think going for a bluff catch is probably slightly better. I'd need to see some evidence of the Kx range before I start value betting this spot liberally.

 

[grebe]

Maybe at some frequency. But how often is a decent player calling a UTG raise from +1 going to:

1. Have KQ, KJ, KT?
2. Raise it against a c-bet into 3 people with 2 people still to act behind?

I'm not saying it's not possible, just that it seems unlikely enough that I think going for a bluff catch is probably slightly better. I'd need to see some evidence of the Kx range before I start value betting this spot liberally.

Fair point, but how often would a good player just throw out a bluff on the flop then just give up? Obvious we are not getting a good player's A game here.


orrrrr....maybe it was a stone bluff on the flop (because he is tilting), then he caught that Q and thought...."showdown value".

 

[warma]

Unfortunately, the conclusion is a bit boring. I thought for a bit about betting but ended up checking with the intention of calling most bets. He snap checked behind which obviously meant I was good. Didn’t get to see his hand.

I wanted to see if anyone saw any value in a riverbet because I felt kinda nitty at the time. But perhaps there just wasn’t that much to get value from. He shouldn’t have Kx with the flop raise and the straight draws either got there or made a small pair.

How did you not see the hand? Who won if you both checked?

 

[Legend5555]

How did you not see the hand? Who won if you both checked?

Hero won. Once it went check check, hero knew he was good and likely just tabled his hand immediately. So villain didn't have to show.

 

[Eriks]

Fair point, but how often would a good player just throw out a bluff on the flop then just give up? Obvious we are not getting a good player's A game here.


orrrrr....maybe it was a stone bluff on the flop (because he is tilting), then he caught that Q and thought...."showdown value".

That’s actually a possibility I didn’t consider. No, he was not on his A game this night

 

[Coyote]

The morale of the story: Poker sucks.
Swimming in poker chips is a much nicer, healthier and stress-free activity.

 

[Eriks]

The morale of the story: Poker sucks.
Swimming in poker chips is a much nicer, healthier and stress-free activity.

Chips > poker!