You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
20nl KK facing re-raise all in on river
LUFC93
Member Posts: 9
PlayerActionCardsAmountPotBalanceBigHawk89Small blind £0.10£0.10£44.40LUFC93Big blind £0.20£0.30£22.02 Your hole cardsKK fishman402Call £0.20£0.50£16.01KING2600Fold wAr25Call £0.20£0.70£22.44Fulham185Call £0.20£0.90£41.74BigHawk89Fold LUFC93Raise £0.60£1.50£21.42fishman402Call £0.60£2.10£15.41wAr25Call £0.60£2.70£21.84Fulham185Call £0.60£3.30£41.14Flop 3104 LUFC93Bet £1.80£5.10£19.62fishman402Fold wAr25Call £1.80£6.90£20.04Fulham185Fold Turn 9 LUFC93Check wAr25Check River 2 LUFC93Bet £3.20£10.10£16.42wAr25All-in £20.04£30.14£0.00LUFC93Fold wAr25Muck wAr25Win £12.63 £12.63wAr25Return £16.84£0.67£29.47
Comments
Cbetting the flop is good you need to do this to balance when you cbet with missed hands to + for value obviously once he has called he is intrested in the hand so we need to bet again on the turn.
As played i think you have to fold the river looks like he got there
With 3 limpers you wanna make it at least £1.20 maybe £1.40-£1.50 if you got all these limpy folk.
Bet bigger on the flop, bet the turn definitely.
flop is ok
bet turn
river ! fold
You need to bet bigger pre-flop, as the others have said. You don't want to be playing KK, four-handed to a flop, especially out of position. Make it a bigger raise to i) extract value while you're ahead and ii) try to thin the field, preferably to heads-up.
The flop bet is just about perfect in my eyes and I'll come onto other peoples' posts in a moment.
You should bet the turn: After getting the call on the flop, you're still ahead of most of your opponents range and they have shown interest. They're likely to pay you off for another bet, unless you think there's a possibility that this player floats alot of flops to look for weakness on the turn so they can bluff. That's a specific read, which you haven't given us, but would, in my eyes, justify a check on a board like this.
On the river, after the check/check on the turn I'd probably bet a little more for value. You can get a call from a Ten or a 9 that thinks you're just trying to take the pot down. When your opponent shoves, I think this can definitely be a call if you think that i) your opponent is the type to overvalue top pair or ii) your opponent makes these big overbet bluffs often.
You've played the hand very weakly with your check on the turn and your opponent could very easily think that you are just trying to take it down on the river with air or are making a small value-bet with one-pair intending to fold to a raise. Most players would bet-fold on the river here with, let's say JT, considering how the hand has played. If your opponent knows that, this increases the chances that he's bluffing or is turning a weak ten into a bluff. There are certainly many ways to justify calling the river, depending on what we think of our opponent. In a vacuum I'd say it's a fold but that advice isn't worth much really because there's so much meta-game that we don't know about.
Bet the turn and the decision on the river is alot easier. It's normally the correct value play and makes the game so much more straightforward.
On this board, my thoughts are that a half-pot bet is going to get called by a Ten, alot of underpairs and perhaps some floats. Given the two low cards are 34, it's probably unlikely that we get a call from either of those, but perhaps if the board was T83 we could get a call from second pair. On the turn we can bet again and still be called by a Ten or even an underpair and possibly raised by those floaters as we have left room for them to do this by not making the pot huge with our flop and turn bets.
If we bet £2.40-£3 on the flop, that would still likely be called by a Ten or 99, 88, etc but isn't it less likely that we now get called on the turn? Also, how likely are they to float a big flop bet?
I think it's especially important to think about our pre-flop raising ranges when we talk about flop bet sizing. If we're raising a tight range pre-flop, then we shouldn't be betting big on flops like this as we'll be very exploitable to good opponents: "I've got 44, he's raising and always bets the flop big. If I hit my set, I know I'm getting paid". If we're raising a loose range, then on boards like this we want to be making small c-bets to keep our bluffs cheap.
I would say that the best value play on this type of board is to make a bet between 1/2 and 2/3 pot. It also seems like the best bluffing play. We're only getting called by a narrow range of made hands, there are few draws to protect against and we ought to know which of our opponents are tricky enough to float us. Why do we want to make a big bet that only gets value on one street unless we're either beat or our opponent is "spewy"? (I hate using that word but it's late and my brain can't think of an alternative)
Is there something I'm missing?
i would have bet bigger pre to go heads up with some1 bet on flop is good but you got to bet on turn why did you slow down? the player called a bet on flop meaning he has a hand so you bet for value and there you could have found out if he hit something big like a set or 2 pair or he may have folded. in my opinion hes making a move on you as he prob puting you on ak aq aj tbh
1) I don't think a decent opponent is calling us down on more than one street for big bet-sizes with just a pair on this board. We can't give them credit for JJ+ so we have to be looking at a bare Ten, 99 and lower. If we make it £2.20 (2/3 pot) here, the pot is £7.70 on the turn. Any further bet is going to be around £4-£5 and decent players are smart enough to know that means frequently facing a bet for the rest on the river, with a pot of around £17 and an effective stack of £14. We look like we're trying to get the lot in. (2/3 pot seems to be the lower limit for alot of people suggesting bigger bets)
I don't think we should be basing all our bet sizes on the assumption that our opponents are spewy enough to make that call on the turn with a bare Ten. Some will be, others wont.
If we get them to call £1.80 on the flop, then perhaps £3.45-£4 on the turn, that's alot more money in the long-term from those decent players. Of course our turn bet can be bigger sometimes, player and board dependent, etc... I think you have to play against a very high ratio of fish to decent players to make the bigger flop bet more profitable. I don't play enough cash at NL20 to know if it's awash with fish but more generally, surely we don't want to be basing our strategy on playing only weak players. At least that's how it seems to me.
2) This basically depends on our image. If we're raising pre-flop alot then our c-betting image isn't going to be strong. Obviously I wouldn't want to regularly be up against as many players as in this hand...
3) Exploiting people who might be floating us is going to be entirely dependent on our reads on them. Some will raise a bet on the turn, against others we'll want to check the turn as the OP did here. Essentially, though, I think we can only really be floated on this flop if we bet it reasonably small: Betting £2.70 or more is going to make the pot too big for all but the most courageous to float and if we bet £2.20, then the chances of a bet being raised on the turn as a bluff become virtually nil as the bet will be too big if we're going to maintain that 2/3 pot line. I think with a 1/2 pot bet on both streets, both a raise of our turn barrell and a bet if we check remain viable bluffs for our opponent, or may at least be perceived to be viable. A small c-bet might even lead to a bluff-raise on the flop. (Woo-hoo!)
4) When it comes to big bets being exploitable, just look at what happens if we do this: By the turn we're putting in around £5, the pot is now £12, so what do we do if our opponent shoves? Are we going to fold now? It'll be £14 to win £30 or so. If we are stacking off here, then it's been incredibly easy for our opponent to set-mine, call the flop, raise the turn and get our stack.
This is even with the small pot size generated by the pre-flop action here, which we all feel should have been bigger.
It seems to me that this big bet strategy only works when we know our opponent is willing to stack-off with top-pair or worse in the face of a pre-flop raise, a big bet on the flop and a big bet on the turn. If our opponents aren't going to call their stack off light, then we shouldn't be sizing our bets to get stacks in. I think we can only get stacks in with this board against decent players if we give our opponent the chance to bluff us and if we know that they're liable to do that. That requires us to make smaller bets. If we know they're not liable to bluff off their stack or call it off with just top pair, then smaller bets are best for value and allow us to get away when we're beat. (Although that's still going to be pretty difficult)
In the absence of information, do we just assume that all random players are weak and throw their money in light? Alternatively do we think they're going to call two streets with top pair and then fold the river with half of their stack in the middle?
I'm probably really overthinking things...
As to whether we ever get floated or bluff-raised, as I say, that's entirely dependent on our reads of our opponents. We can't say it never happens because we know it does. Against most players folding to a turn raise is fine, probably optimal. But I'm talking about playing with specific reads and dynamics. If we know our opponent is capable of this, then exploit it...
It all comes down to what our opponents are thinking. I don't think we can put all limp-callers in the same box: If they're total fish who see top pair and think it's the nuts, then of course we can and should just make big bets.
Those players that are not that fishy, (though still losing players) are likely to be limp-calling because they don't want to build a huge pot pre-flop. For big bets to be better, we have to believe that they're then going to build a huge pot post-flop with just top-pair. I don't think that happens nearly as often as they'll build a moderately-sized pot. Do our opponents call two streets of big bets with just one-pair? Fish will but I don't think all limp-callers do.
So the question is simply; what proportion of our opponents are fish compared to those "decent", losing players?
I don't think that either of us is going to be able to prove one way or another which is categorically better at NL20. Generally speaking, though, I see this "bet bigger" advice being given out alot. From some people it seems automatic to think that half-pot or so is too small. I don't think that's right and I think it's less and less applicable the higher up the levels you move. In fact, I think it's only really applicable at the truely micro levels and by the time you get to NL20, my opinion is that big bets aren't best anymore as a general rule.
the only way your calling is if you have solid read oppo bluffs mad like this
limp callers are like the eaiest to play against and exploit