Blah KK hand, €1-€2 NL

CaptainNemo

I am playing about €500, Villain about €250. Villain is a loose-passive player, bit of a station, doesn't bet unless he has the nuts. I have somewhat of a loose image.

I am on the button with KhKd. 1 limper and I make it €10 to go.

Villain calls in the SB (or BB, not 100% sure). Limper folds. Flop is Q 8 6 rainbow or something similar. Villain checks and I bet €20.

Villain calls. Turn is a J, suit irrelevant. Villain checks. I bet 60.

Villain calls and checks again quickly. River is a 3. I bet 75. Villain just calls.

What do you expect him to have, and how did I play this on all streets?

Killme00

CaptainNemo wrote:

and checks again quickly. I bet 75. Villain just calls.
QUOTE]

what? What was the river card


The flop, you bet the pot and he calls.
The turn, you bet the pot and he calls
Why did you bet 75 on the river if he has already called two pot sized bets.

valor

i would have just shoved the river

villain has KQ? Idk these idiots can call you down with anything

CaptainNemo

Killme00 wrote:

CaptainNemo wrote:

and checks again quickly. I bet 75. Villain just calls.
QUOTE]

what? What was the river card


The flop, you bet the pot and he calls.
The turn, you bet the pot and he calls
Why did you bet 75 on the river if he has already called two pot sized bets.

Sorry, edited to add the river card.

I was value betting the river. I had him very firmly on a Q throughout the hand and was positive I would get paid off by any hand in the range of AQ - Q10 based on how this guy plays.

Van Dice

Surely standard hand? Villain's most likely hands are KQ and AQ. If he has you beat as the post suggests then he played bad and he let you off lightly, either way you have lots of sklansky $

CaptainNemo

Anyway, not to drag things out, he had QJ. I very nearly checked the river but then decided to bet it for value and stewed for about 10 minutes afterwards. I couldn't understand how he didn't raise at any point in the hand but eventually decided that I just misjudged things and made a bad river bet. Nearly put me on tilt though.

valor

you should DEFINITELY bet the river for value vs the player described, this was just UL. You did make a bad river bet though, you should have bet it all

CaptainNemo

valor wrote:

you should DEFINITELY bet the river for value vs the player described, this was just UL. You did make a bad river bet though, you should have bet it all

I'm glad to hear you say that because I was beating myself up over this hand. And of course you're right, if I'm betting I should be putting him all in there, if he's calling 75 he's calling the rest.

The_Prof

You simply got outplayed by one of the many Macau (im assuming that that´s where u played the hand) sharks. Whereas some of the amateur posters in this thread suggest that the correct play was to push all-in, and that when you valuebet he should have raised all-in rather than flat call, these guys are simply thinking a few levels below the expert villain.

He realises that yes, he could have doubled up on this hand, but instead chooses a far greater EV play, by incorporating metagame into his decision process, realising that a call will likely put you on tilt in future, and that the +ev spots generated as a result down the line are a far greater choice than to get a further 100 euro or so in this specific hand.

jimmii

I'm always betting the river against this type of player they will call with all sorts of things that you are ahead of not sure if they'd willingly call off all there stack but you will make a lot of money off them.

cardshark202

The_Prof wrote:

You simply got outplayed by one of the many Macau (im assuming that that´s where u played the hand) sharks. Whereas some of the amateur posters in this thread suggest that the correct play was to push all-in, and that when you valuebet he should have raised all-in rather than flat call, these guys are simply thinking a few levels below the expert villain.

He realises that yes, he could have doubled up on this hand, but instead chooses a far greater EV play, by incorporating metagame into his decision process, realising that a call will likely put you on tilt in future, and that the +ev spots generated as a result down the line are a far greater choice than to get a further 100 euro or so in this specific hand.

Good post

CaptainNemo

The_Prof wrote:

You simply got outplayed by one of the many Macau (im assuming that that´s where u played the hand) sharks. Whereas some of the amateur posters in this thread suggest that the correct play was to push all-in, and that when you valuebet he should have raised all-in rather than flat call, these guys are simply thinking a few levels below the expert villain.

He realises that yes, he could have doubled up on this hand, but instead chooses a far greater EV play, by incorporating metagame into his decision process, realising that a call will likely put you on tilt in future, and that the +ev spots generated as a result down the line are a far greater choice than to get a further 100 euro or so in this specific hand.

Just when you think you're starting to get a handle on this game someone shows you a glimpse of the next few levels up. It's scary up there.

mrflash

you were unlucky in this hand. you have it heads up, theres no ace, you did everything right, i don't believe in shoving on the end. you want to get paid off so the bet you made was just fine. its horrible to get beat by such a weak player, but it happens. i'm sure you will catch him again, if you haven't already.

cooker3

mrflash wrote:

i don't believe in shoving on the end. you want to get paid off so the bet you made was just fine.

So you think the loose passive calling station fish would fold to a push on the river, yeah?