Small Stakes Shorthanded NL Poker Forums

Page 2: NL200 KK top set at 3-bet pot, 264 BB deep


MatiKosa

Avatar for MatiKosa

25 posts
Joined 12/2009

My friend was the player with JClub TClub in this spot. I told him, that he was super lucky, because the guy with KK had an extremely hard situation and he will call/shove the majority of time.
However, lukasz728 claimed, that this guy had such an easy fold. I didn't agree with him, so I decided to post this problematic hand here Smile

Posted over 1 year ago

Tackleberry

Avatar for Tackleberry

3429 posts
Joined 10/2009

My friend was the player with JClub TClub in this spot. I told him, that he was super lucky, because the guy with KK had an extremely hard situation and he will call/shove the majority of time.
However, lukasz728 claimed, that this guy had such an easy fold. I didn't agree with him, so I decided to post this problematic hand here Smile


OK, now I understand. Smile

Posted over 1 year ago

terp

Avatar for terp

Coach
1521 posts
Joined 01/2008

really hate the sizing by the dude with JTs since it's pretty much impossible for him to be bluffing with this amount, unless he belongs to the school of 'i will bluff by trying to appear committed,' and the people who do this basically do it exclusively with bluffs, which means he can't be valuebetting, which is also terrible.

this is prob a fold for that reason, that we have top set, that another set/two pair is pretty much zero and that we're getting terrible odds to continue.

i suppose you think this is interesting from the KK perspective, but if it's interesting v the very top of his range that you beat, it means your play with a flush is terrible.

Posted over 1 year ago

TecmoSuperBowl

Avatar for TecmoSuperBowl

4878 posts
Joined 01/2009

this is prob a fold for that reason, that we have top set, that another set/two pair is pretty much zero and that we're getting terrible odds to continue



I'm curious to know if you actually calculated the odds? I did, as you can see in my previous post, and we are getting far from terrible odds imo. In fact, with ANY implied odds, we are getting the right odds.

Posted over 1 year ago

Tackleberry

Avatar for Tackleberry

3429 posts
Joined 10/2009

I'm curious to know if you actually calculated the odds? I did, as you can see in my previous post, and we are getting far from terrible odds imo. In fact, with ANY implied odds, we are getting the right odds.


I agree! Hero has position and just needs to win another $176 in case he hits the river to make a call break-even. I doubt Villain will just c/f the river in case the board pairs and Hero bets i.e. $250 into the pot of $700.

Additionally I don´t think Villain has a flush 100% in this spot.

Posted over 1 year ago

terp

Avatar for terp

Coach
1521 posts
Joined 01/2008

another 176 is all of the guy's stack, basically

if he always has a flush then call/fold UI is breakeven and any profit here comes from his bluffs. i'm really not sure if he bluffs with that sizing, but even if he does this is just so thin to continue...

Posted over 1 year ago

TecmoSuperBowl

Avatar for TecmoSuperBowl

4878 posts
Joined 01/2009

if he always has a flush then call/fold UI is breakeven and any profit here comes from his bluffs.



We breakeven when we don't improve and stack him a large % of the time when we do. Our profits come from when we improve and he doesn't fold his flush, not from when he bluffs.

Posted over 1 year ago

Tackleberry

Avatar for Tackleberry

3429 posts
Joined 10/2009

We breakeven when we don't improve and stack him a large % of the time when we do. Our profits come from when we improve and he doesn't fold his flush, not from when he bluffs.


Yep, I already was confused and thought I was missing sth. Smile

Posted over 1 year ago




HomePoker ForumsSmall Stakes Shorthanded NL → NL200 KK top set at 3-bet pot, 264 BB deep