computer room is mother in-law central which means I have about 1/2 an hour to between the end of dinner and her "beddy bye time" to squeeze in all my computer activities. Being as it is now 6:45 I'm in a race against time.
Originally Posted by bw07507
Given that you have already put $60 in preflop and you say this opponent has bluffy tendencies, theres just no way you can fold imo. His bet size of full pot also looks stupid bluffy. Who knows what his range is for flatting a 4bet oop but Im guessing theres not a ton of weak aces in his range as he probably jams them preflop if he thinks your full of it. I think he has a bunch of KQ, QJ and other air hands enough to just shove it in. His whole stack is basically in anyways.
I did say he had some bluffy tendencies but my opinion is based on a couple of hands where he has pushed back post flop and then folded to continued aggression. Also, he's multi tabling (4-6 tables as I recall) and his stats are actually pretty loose in that light.
Originally Posted by sky4ever
I would auto fold kings here.He could easily hold AQ here.And as far as pot odds
go, you`ve only invested 60$, and since he`s got you covered, just doesn't worth staking in another 200$.
Since he had a 300$ stack and only invested 60$ preflop his whole stack was not in at all.I don`t think he would commit himself to the pot on the flop with a such a large bet without a big ace, after hero showed a lot of strength preflop.
By bluffy I didn't mean stupid. I believe he respects my play and has got to put me on AQs min and more likely KK-AA, so I doubt AQ is even worth considering. As for the rest of your reasoning, I tend to agree. I don't see how he makes this play without at least AK. Infact, I put him on AK and only AK.
Originally Posted by F Paulsson
I wouldn't fold. I hate myself the times I'm wrong and he shows up with AK, but I don't think he will 2/3rds of the time (or whatever your break-even point is).
If you want more justification than just "FP wouldn't fold" I like saying to myself "gee, why would he bet here if he has an ace?" and call. I'm surprisingly often right, and you'll see 99, TT, QQ and various other weird hands much more often than you might think. AQ shouldn't be in his range, and while AK might be (some people do weird things with big hands when stacks get a little deeper) but again - why would he donk with AK? He's either crushing you, or drawing near dead so why not let you bluff?
OK, now I'm worried. If the 2009 WSOP
ME champion thinks a call is in order here I may have to put a little more thought into this.
I folded of course instanly and without remorse but not without a lot of pain. At the time, I didn't think there was much room for bluffing
on his part and I think he felt that given the PF strength I had shown I might be reluctant to give up on a hand like AQs or KK making his full pot bet a reasonable value bet in his mind if he's holding AK.
I agree comlpletely that AQ is a nearly impossible holding for him but I'm surprised you would put hands as weak as 99-QQ in his range. I understand that your assessment is only within the context of my narrow description of his playing style but even so, he's got to put me within a VERY limited range of hands of which KK is only a small part. If he himself were not holding an ace could anyone make this kind of play? In my mind no. I read confidence into bet, not desperation despite it's size. That said, I believe he would have checked it back to me had he held AA which the way I saw it pretty much left him with specifically AK. I don't think his play was optimal however. His bet was way too big considering that I still could have held AA. In his position, assuming I had AK, I would have bet about 1/2 the pot to see how the button responded. I may have even folded that to a shove.