set of Kings on the river by Joe

Submitted by : Joe

PokerStars Game #18870518213: Hold'em No Limit ($1/$2) - 2008/07/16 - 18:45:34 (ET)
Table 'Siarnaq' 9-max Seat #9 is the button
Seat 1: muscapia ($122.30 in chips)
Seat 2: rygg ($201.55 in chips)
Seat 3: Joeik ($295.25 in chips)
Seat 4: YaDaDaMeeN21 ($264.75 in chips)
Seat 5: Sharukh10 ($37 in chips)
Seat 6: Wexley ($216.95 in chips)
Seat 7: ranka666 ($203.50 in chips)
Seat 8: NoNo_50 ($37 in chips)
Seat 9: ryanj9352 ($220 in chips)
muscapia: posts small blind $1
rygg: posts big blind $2

Holecards
Dealt to Joeik
Joeik : raises $4 to $6
YaDaDaMeeN21: raises $18 to $24
Sharukh10: folds
Wexley: folds
ranka666: folds
NoNo_50: folds
ryanj9352: folds
muscapia: folds
rygg: folds
Joeik : calls $18

Flop (Pot : $51.00)

   
Joeik : checks
YaDaDaMeeN21: checks

Turn (Pot : $51.00)

   
Joeik : bets $38
YaDaDaMeeN21: calls $38

River (Pot : $127.00)

   
Joeik : bets $30
YaDaDaMeeN21: raises $64 to $94
Joeik : ?

U mean ur putting him here on aces squarely? are you seriously thinking about not-shoving?

?????????? why would he check aces on this flop

youre debating between instashove, normal shove or timebank shove?

his range is prolly AK/AA about same % of the time + some showdownable hands turned into bluffs because of your riverbetsizing(plus possibly AQss?)

so you are afraid of taking his money cuz he might go /wrist right?

DUDE INSTANT SHOVE WHAT ARE YOU SCARE OFF ? if you scare dont play ring lol seriously

Lol.

instant fold

Player dependent. If its against a very solid regular that has respect in your game, flat here is fine.

'Zomg LOL u have 2nd nuts U have to shove if he has AA its cooler' is seriously a retarded advice

never flat, how is he a solid regular here checking AA behind on that flop, if he has AA sick set-up, get it in.

On July 16 2008 16:52 Baal wrote: never flat, how is he a solid regular here checking AA behind on that flop, if he has AA sick set-up, get it in.

Why wouldn't a solid regular check here with AA? I check aces here 150bb+ deep atleast 30% of the time and most of the decent regulars in 2/4+ plays it the same way. Your underestimating how tight UTG's raise is against UTG+1 3bet. Solid reg at UTG will only setmine and i doubt he'd just flat OOP with AK(Possibly even fold).

but obv against retards this is shove. i'm talking about a situation where your tangling with a decent reg

did we bet 30$ on the river to induce a raise?

damn actually i didn't even see the hand carefully. deff gotta shove with the $30 bet on the river

yeah i mean what are you trying to do with that $30 bet? its such a small tilty inducing bet, i would say shove normally but i mean because of that bet i say shove x1000000000.

Is this a joke?

Joe, you're way too tight to be playing full ring. o_O

ya, wrap your minds around that one

yah you are folding there....


wut is ur tougth AA? ,, pretty sick but never fold

im a nit but omg i can sleep getting stacked in this spot with aa. both of u guys wanted more value and went a little tricky . you both deserve this cooler imo. lol

I think you should fold.

On July 16 2008 16:56 AndrewSong wrote: Show nested quote + On July 16 2008 16:52 Baal wrote: never flat, how is he a solid regular here checking AA behind on that flop, if he has AA sick set-up, get it in. Why wouldn't a solid regular check here with AA? I check aces here 150bb+ deep atleast 30% of the time and most of the decent regulars in 2/4+ plays it the same way. Your underestimating how tight UTG's raise is against UTG+1 3bet. Solid reg at UTG will only setmine and i doubt he'd just flat OOP with AK(Possibly even fold).

if he calls only to set-mine then he is a fish, so we return to the same point...

also if he is set mining this is an easy all-in

the only logical reason for flatting here is saving chips amirite? then just fold dont flat imo
i respect higher stakes players who crush but for 150bbs this is a little too nitty even for me, maybe if it were as deep as marshalls 600 vs 800bbs type but here never flat for 150bbs

wow unless this opponent is playing 2/1.2/0 then i'm shoving. also why no cbet on the flop?

30 into 127 pot - that made my day, Hi Phil... " welcome to valuecity " :D

On July 16 2008 17:58 thewh00sel wrote: Joe, you're way too tight to be playing full ring. o_O

damn, is that possible?

easiest push eva

wtf i dont want to be mean but i dont think he have a set of aces here because he didnt bet on the flop also i think he raised you on the river because you made such a small value bet he could easily have a set of 6,2 or 9 i would either push or re raise 2x if he have aces then its a stupid cooler

Dont be results oriented.

I hate this because you know you have to shove and you know that the god damn assfaggot has AA pretty often, lol.

However, in your heart you know it's a push^^.

wat?

lol @ non nits giving full ring advice...

vs very solid regs this is a obv call

vs others i guess reshove

Obviously a push, AK is definitely in his range, not mentioning some weaker strangely played hands or random crap he might turn up with occassionally (possibly also AsQs).

And no, playing FR doesn't necessarilly mean nitting it up.

On July 17 2008 10:01 Pulda wrote: Obviously a push, AK is definitely in his range, not mentioning some weaker strangely played hands or random crap he might turn up with occassionally (possibly also AsQs). And no, playing FR doesn't necessarilly mean nitting it up.

I'm a semi-regular at both 1-2 6 max and FR.I don't think 6 max players realize that it's almost not even the same game at FR.People don't 3 bet UTG raisers in UTG+1 with AQs (especially not this particular reg which I am quite familiar with). You can't even make the case that he's polarizing his 3 betting to an UTG raiser cause the reality is that almost all regs in FR 1/2 don't do this. Hell, in FR, lots of regs even flat JJ QQ in UTG+1 to UTG raise. His range here is AA, KK and AK, which leaves us with AK, AA. I even think ( not saying it is correct) that this particular player flats AK on the river the vast majority of the time because he might think you were set mining and were going for CR on flop with flopped set, and decided to bet river for value. IMO, he has AA 90% of the time here, and AK 10%. I certainly can't fault a push, but the extremely nitty dynamics + nitty reg make a fold a least an option to be considered.

Even if his range here is AA,AK only its still a good shove cuz he wont ever fold AK and he has it as often as AA.

lol @ all the NL50 and lower players comment here and not knowing the player, AFAIK, this guy is super nitty, well, all of them are at FR. I would shove here happily with the 2nd nuts after making a very tricky bet on the river, if I'm beat, I insta post the hand on LP, say something trashy and whine about how bad i run, then move up and keep playing.

On July 17 2008 03:15 Darki wrote: wtf i dont want to be posting when i know nothing about nl200 fr but i dont think he have a set of aces here because he didnt bet on the flop also i think he raised you on the river because you made such a small value bet he could easily have a set of 6,2 or 9 i would either push or re raise 2x if he have aces then its a stupid cooler

lol @ putting him on a set of 6,2 or 9s. No regular FR nit raises utg+1 with such PPs, and if he did well he was probably sweating hard and jumping in excitement for making something new, but in this case I highly doubt he raises utg to $24 with 22,66,99.

On July 17 2008 03:15 Darki wrote: wtf i dont want to be mean but i dont think he have a set of aces here because he didnt bet on the flop also i think he raised you on the river because you made such a small value bet he could easily have a set of 6,2 or 9 i would either push or re raise 2x if he have aces then its a stupid cooler

There is a higher probability that a monkey wins the main event then a FR nit regular re-raising 22, 66, 99 in UTG+1. I don't want to be mean, but every part of your analysis is terrible.

On July 17 2008 10:53 phonetic wrote: Show nested quote + On July 17 2008 10:01 Pulda wrote: Obviously a push, AK is definitely in his range, not mentioning some weaker strangely played hands or random crap he might turn up with occassionally (possibly also AsQs). And no, playing FR doesn't necessarilly mean nitting it up. I'm a semi-regular at both 1-2 6 max and FR.I don't think 6 max players realize that it's almost not even the same game at FR.People don't 3 bet UTG raisers in UTG+1 with AQs (especially not this particular reg which I am quite familiar with). You can't even make the case that he's polarizing his 3 betting to an UTG raiser cause the reality is that almost all regs in FR 1/2 don't do this. Hell, in FR, lots of regs even flat JJ QQ in UTG+1 to UTG raise. His range here is AA, KK and AK, which leaves us with AK, AA. I even think ( not saying it is correct) that this particular player flats AK on the river the vast majority of the time because he might think you were set mining and were going for CR on flop with flopped set, and decided to bet river for value. IMO, he has AA 90% of the time here, and AK 10%. I certainly can't fault a push, but the extremely nitty dynamics + nitty reg make a fold a least an option to be considered.

Just to clarify this up, I've played a ton of FR in the past, especially NL100 and NL200 on PS.

Oh and of course I don't expect him to show up here with AQs very often, but it's not like its impossible. People 3bet it anyway from time to time.

I don't know this particular player much, but I would never fold this without much info, which is the same situation Joe was in.

On July 16 2008 18:03 phexac wrote: I think you should fold.

i think you should be banned from midstakes if you're serious

and wtf how is this even a question?

we have to shove given how small our river bet is

low/micro stakes players who have no idea how the midstakes FR games run should not comment on the subject, because your understanding of the game is horribly flawed..

AK and AA both in his range but you're getting decent odds and he isn't gonna flat AK so flat here

shoving is bad bc you are getting far worse odds on a shove, and the only reason you are calling the river is to gamble that he has AK instead of AA

tim,

KKK is foldable here, though it's pretty rare. if you don't have enough FR experience to know that, then don't tell people that they should be banned for suggesting it. i have definitely seen FR regs flat a hand like 999 in a spot like this. obv the villain here can't have 999 but if we know he would flat 999 in a spot where that hand was in his range, then we probably have to fold. (i do think that the post about folding may have been a joke though)

just for further clarification, if KKK is foldable here then i think we have butchered the hand previously (we should lead the flop and proceed accordingly)

On July 17 2008 13:27 [vital]Myth wrote: AK and AA both in his range but you're getting decent odds and he isn't gonna flat AK so flat here shoving is bad bc you are getting far worse odds on a shove, and the only reason you are calling the river is to gamble that he has AK instead of AA

YEA! this is wat i was tryin to say

get it in!!!

On July 17 2008 12:55 TimDawg wrote: Show nested quote + On July 16 2008 18:03 phexac wrote: I think you should fold. i think you should be banned from midstakes if you're serious

i agree LOL!!

i think its a snap call, possibly a snap minreraise/fold

i think if he vbet a standard amount on the river its a snap call. but since he induced a bluff i think he has to shove.

If he flats 999 to that bet shouldnt we be folding this preflop? I mean .. LOL

id prob fold

i flat

raising here is bad imo vs most

On July 17 2008 14:16 handbanana21 wrote: i think if he vbet a standard amount on the river its a snap call. but since he induced a bluff i think he has to shove.

why would we shove if the opponent is bluffing? so that he'll call with J high?

well the villain could be raising for value on the river with AK as well, which would be more prone to call a shove, so since he induced the play i think that villains range could include made hands that turned into a bluff on the river as well as AA and AK

On July 17 2008 17:13 handbanana21 wrote: well the villain could be raising for value on the river with AK as well, which would be more prone to call a shove, so since he induced the play i think that villains range could include made hands that turned into a bluff on the river as well as AA and AK

just help us out here and tell us wtf YOU had ffs ROFL

On July 17 2008 13:32 [vital]Myth wrote: tim, KKK is foldable here, though it's pretty rare. if you don't have enough FR experience to know that, then don't tell people that they should be banned for suggesting it. i have definitely seen FR regs flat a hand like 999 in a spot like this. obv the villain here can't have 999 but if we know he would flat 999 in a spot where that hand was in his range, then we probably have to fold. (i do think that the post about folding may have been a joke though)

wtf

just when i think FR can't possibly be any nittier there's always a hand like this posted where i give bad advice (i guess) and folding the 2nd nuts is good. and it seems you're always the one to correct me

sorry if i gave bad advice but i don't see how we could evvvvver consider folding here against even the nittiest of nits

On July 17 2008 17:50 whamm! wrote: Show nested quote + On July 17 2008 17:13 handbanana21 wrote: well the villain could be raising for value on the river with AK as well, which would be more prone to call a shove, so since he induced the play i think that villains range could include made hands that turned into a bluff on the river as well as AA and AK just help us out here and tell us wtf YOU had ffs ROFL

lol qft
I'd love to call myself villain sometime
the Julious Cesar syndrome

even Daut stands in awe watching Myth's nittyness

On July 17 2008 13:32 [vital]Myth wrote: tim, KKK is foldable here, though it's pretty rare. if you don't have enough FR experience to know that, then don't tell people that they should be banned for suggesting it. i have definitely seen FR regs flat a hand like 999 in a spot like this. obv the villain here can't have 999 but if we know he would flat 999 in a spot where that hand was in his range, then we probably have to fold. (i do think that the post about folding may have been a joke though)

amen to that

joe shoved and villian showed AA

On July 17 2008 17:13 handbanana21 wrote: well the villain could be raising for value on the river with AK as well, which would be more prone to call a shove, so since he induced the play i think that villains range could include made hands that turned into a bluff on the river as well as AA and AK

no. if villain is bluffing then he's not calling a raise. only AK and AA will call a shove and when we're up against a range of only AK/AA, we are losing on a shove but profiting on a call.

just take a minute and look at what i'm saying. it's EXTREMELY easy to see why shoving is bad and calling is marginal but fine.

and, at OP: lead the flop in the future

besides, villain is just never bluffing here, ever

i don't care if you claim that you bluff here, because you don't. i don't care if you think you can be turning made hands into bluffs here, because you can't

and in fact you'd probably be an even WORSE player if you DID tend to bluff like this

nobody else can advocate the folds i recommend

and even i can't make the folds i recommend

this is obv not a bluff thats why flatcalling is the worst play imo

On July 18 2008 00:49 [vital]Myth wrote: nobody else can advocate the folds i recommend and even i can't make the folds i recommend

loooooooooooooooooooooool its funny bc its true.

Corwin is teh king of "meh im beat here like 99% but fuck it I call".

Just like steve is king of the call with a bluff catcher that can't beat a bluff.

Maybe Im wrong here, if so plz correct me, but If we give him the ridic tight range of AA/AK only, there are 3 combinations of each left so the EV of a shove is the same as for a call, and since we are not even sure his range is that tight doesnt it make it more of a shove for the outside chance he has something else there that is raise calling ?

no, if you call you are getting like 4:1 or ridic massive odds, if you shove you are getting 2:1 or less AND you're risking more

plus if you shove AK is somewhat likely to fold, AND AK might not raise the river anyway, AND worse is never calling so the fact that he could have worse is irrelevant

I don't wanna give out my reads,but I know the villain and he has AA here 100% of the time.

i've been playing poker again

shoving top pair trash kicker for value non stop telling myself PLZ CALL PLZ CALL PLZ CALL

then i see this thread and i just don't know what the hell to do with myself

/life

On July 18 2008 02:45 Cro)Deadman wrote: I don't wanna give out my reads,but I know the villain and he has AA here 100% of the time.

You basically just gave out all your reads for the player

But if we are 50/50 we just split whatever is in the pot, it doesnt matter if there is 200 or 200k in it, the EV is the same.

Besides I dont think reads of this particular player are very relevant since Joe didnt have those at the time and prolly wont be playing too much 200nl fr regularly.

On July 17 2008 20:08 handbanana21 wrote: joe shoved and villian showed AA

j*&$^&$quot said &*$^#&*$( ****ing rigged site zomg &^&#^%$&


amen to that.

On July 18 2008 03:08 EvilSky wrote: But if we are 50/50 we just split whatever is in the pot, it doesnt matter if there is 200 or 200k in it, the EV is the same.

no, this isn't true at all

if we are 50% to win but we get 4:1 that's clearly far superior to getting 2:1 with the same winning %

but i think it's highly unreasonable to think we're 50% to win here. AA is just a lot more likely than AK to be shown down, especially if we shove

Thanks Corwin for advocating some of the points I thought about and creating the discussion

The result is that I shoved with little thought and got called by AA obviously. Wasnt sure if it was bad at that point, but later I started to think it was a mistake so thats why I posted it.

I didnt know villain much because I dont play NL 1/2 FR at all or very rarely, but I was playing already like 2-3 hours before having this guy on 3 or 4 of my tables and he really played very nitty and I knew it, just wasnt sure how nitty that exactly is.

And I think people who autoposted something in the lines "omg wtf how are u even thinking of not getting it allin here" should sometimes switch the autopilot off and actually think about situations themselves.

And Rekrul, I can assure u that it is sick painfull for me to FOLD ANYTHING DECENT EVER and I actually rarely do (you can notice that by seeing that I actually almost always have the result to the hands I post), thats why I have to post a lot of hand discussion topics at LP to have people like Myth keep reminding me that I should be folding a lot more

It was ridiculous obvios he has AA, not because of the hand... but for the fact this is a thread... if he had botton set this wouldnt be here.

the pf raiser gets a PERFECT flop to bet aces on. PERFECT!!! there is so little chance that a villain will not bet out aces that i think this really cuts back on the % of aces in his range @ river. i am in the camp that says shove river for value.

On July 18 2008 03:52 Joe wrote: And I think people who autoposted something in the lines "omg wtf how are u even thinking of not getting it allin here" should sometimes switch the autopilot off and actually think about situations themselves.

sorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry

Its not autopilot -_-

still can't explain the river bet though

id fold this if this meant id have to die if i lose, but if someone elses life was at stake id snap reshove 100% ship ship

i would lead river more and call a shove here. he has AK here often and you want to get value for it. isn't the AK combination like 4 times more likely than AA according to stove? handbanana would probably be shovin' AK here too i think

also i think its a pretty big fail to raise UTG to 3 big blinds... there is nothing winning about doing this unless u intend to do it with like AT+ and all pps

On July 18 2008 19:11 lachlan wrote: also i think its a pretty big fail to raise UTG to 3 big blinds... there is nothing winning about doing this unless u intend to do it with like AT+ and all pps

^^

On July 18 2008 19:11 lachlan wrote: also i think its a pretty big fail to raise UTG to 3 big blinds... there is nothing winning about doing this unless u intend to do it with like AT+ and all pps

this is just a pretty big fail of a comment

opening 3bb is fine, opening 4bb is just better

and lol @ feeling like you "have to" open looser if you're opening for a smaller raise. come on, at least have a clue before being all snotty

On July 18 2008 19:37 [vital]Myth wrote: Show nested quote + On July 18 2008 19:11 lachlan wrote: also i think its a pretty big fail to raise UTG to 3 big blinds... there is nothing winning about doing this unless u intend to do it with like AT+ and all pps this is just a pretty big fail of a comment opening 3bb is fine, opening 4bb is just better and lol @ feeling like you "have to" open looser if you're opening for a smaller raise. come on, at least have a clue before being all snotty

true that comment did come off as a pretty big asshole, sorry, wasnt honestly my intention

all i meant was i think its really bad to raise 3 big blinds utg in any full ring game. the stuff i said about opening wider, well what i meant was i was trying to justify where u might be good to do it if u open heaps.

point of full ring is to stack them with ur monsters, just like all poker games, and raising 3bb with ur strongest range is already a big disadvantage

all of the above my humble honest opinion and i do not mean to offend anyone!

i usually click it back and celebrate.

On July 18 2008 19:42 lachlan wrote: Show nested quote + On July 18 2008 19:37 [vital]Myth wrote:   On July 18 2008 19:11 lachlan wrote: also i think its a pretty big fail to raise UTG to 3 big blinds... there is nothing winning about doing this unless u intend to do it with like AT+ and all pps this is just a pretty big fail of a comment opening 3bb is fine, opening 4bb is just better and lol @ feeling like you "have to" open looser if you're opening for a smaller raise. come on, at least have a clue before being all snotty true that comment did come off as a pretty big asshole, sorry, wasnt honestly my intention all i meant was i think its really bad to raise 3 big blinds utg in any full ring game. the stuff i said about opening wider, well what i meant was i was trying to justify where u might be good to do it if u open heaps. point of full ring is to stack them with ur monsters, just like all poker games, and raising 3bb with ur strongest range is already a big disadvantage all of the above my humble honest opinion and i do not mean to offend anyone!

point of fr isn't really to "stack them with your monsters" if you play midstakes. all the regs play extremely tight and just NEVER put their money in bad. you're constantly just trading coolers with the regs. sure, you stack the fish who call off with garbage but that's the same whether it's FR or 6max or anything.

the point of FR is to pick up far more small pots than anyone else because your opponents play too many tables and they don't fight enough for dead money. almost 100% of your edge in a typical FR game will come from your ability to outplay regulars in small and medium pots.

a side-point of FR is to play a style that induces regs to flip out but that's kinda the point of any game also

regs should die imo

On July 16 2008 16:16 rogier wrote: youre debating between instashove, normal shove or timebank shove?

LOL

he has royal flush here with 4 aces and a joker 90% of the time, ez fold

If this is a flat call I cry at how tough online poker has become

On July 18 2008 03:30 [vital]Myth wrote: Show nested quote + On July 18 2008 03:08 EvilSky wrote: But if we are 50/50 we just split whatever is in the pot, it doesnt matter if there is 200 or 200k in it, the EV is the same. no, this isn't true at all if we are 50% to win but we get 4:1 that's clearly far superior to getting 2:1 with the same winning %

No hes right, based on the assumption that we're 50% to win and villain calls a shove with both AA and AK (ignoring the fact that AK has 2 outs vs KK while KK only has 1 out vs AA). If we are exactly 50% to win any additional money going into the pot is neutral EV.

Anytime someone is calling a push with their entire range then pot odds are irrelevant when choosing between call or raise and only come into play when choosing between call or fold.

On July 19 2008 15:57 JonnyCosMo wrote: If this is a flat call I cry at how easy online poker has become

On July 19 2008 21:15 n0rthf4ce wrote: Show nested quote + On July 19 2008 15:57 JonnyCosMo wrote: If this is a flat call I cry at how easy online poker has become

QFMFT

On July 19 2008 21:18 Rekrul wrote: Show nested quote + On July 19 2008 21:15 n0rthf4ce wrote:   On July 19 2008 15:57 JonnyCosMo wrote: If this is a flat call I cry at how easy online poker has become QFMFT

even NITs agree lol

we cant ever fold or call here
because we are doing very well against his range and the AA which he obv played it very bad is just a very small part of his range

On July 16 2008 16:09 MysticJoey wrote: ?????????? why would he check aces on this flop

I'm guessing the same reason he'd check AK??

This guy is a mega nit, but I'm fairly sure he still three-bets AK pre, even though he is UTG+1. You've gotta value shove given his AA/AK range.

Villain is 9/6/2.16 over 2700 hands in my DB for what is worth.