Quads on flop

shinedown.45 · Apr 8, 2008

What are the proper plays for each street? And should I have just checked preflop considering the button is LAG?

Stacks:
* MP1 with $3.00
* MP2 with $1.76
* PiJaMar with $2.35
* BTN with $5.28
* SB with $4.72
* (hero)BB with $6.30
* UTG with $0.59

Blinds: $0.00/$0.00
Site: pokerstars
* * Dealt to BB:K♠ K♦
* * Sklansky group 1
Preflop:
* * UTG calls [$0.02] 30 calls [$0.02]
* * MP2 calls [$0.02]
* * 1 players fold.
BTN raises $0.08 to $0.10
* * 1 players fold.
Hero raises $0.08 to $0.18
* * 2 players fold.
* * MP2 calls [$0.16] BTN calls [$0.08]
* * Total folds this street: 4
* * Potsize: $0.59
Flop: Q♣ K♥ K♣ Hero:???

The results have been hidden.

Poker Hand Converter By Cardschat.com Poker Forum

Jillychemung · Apr 8, 2008

This is one time where you can slow play your hand. Check/Call here on the flop and turn and value bet the river. If the opponent bets both the flop and the turn, size your river bet a bit larger.

c9h13no3 · Apr 8, 2008

That min-raise preflop just screams I HAS KANGS, PLEASE CALL1!! At least bump it up to $0.25 total.

I'm check/calling on the flop at least. You're first to act, and you have players who may bet behind you. Generally I'm a big fan of betting out, and if the table was loose enough, it still may be the right line here. But your 3-bet preflop is representing JJ+, AK, and even the retards can figure that out. You want to check, and try to convince them as hard as you can that you have JJ.

switch0723 · Apr 8, 2008

Im betting out here, the last thing you will be put on is a king if you lead out, therefore i use the juicy board to maximize value. That board has hit so many drawing hands, flush draws, loads of straight draws, and queens. Therefore im leading out for about .15. That way, it looks weak and your giving villains odds to draw to their cards, you will also get action from a queen

shinedown.45 · Apr 8, 2008

Jillychemung said:
This is one time where you can slow play your hand. Check/Call here on the flop and turn and value bet the river. If the opponent bets both the flop and the turn, size your river bet a bit larger.

I went this route^^^^

PokerStars Game #16571236281: Hold'em No Limit ($0.01/$0.02) - 2008/04/08 - 01:42:25 (ET)
Table 'Ernestina III' 9-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: 11ENDY5:30 ($3 in chips)
Seat 2: theheatwave ($1.76 in chips)
Seat 4: PiJaMar ($2.35 in chips)
Seat 5: bighoyle ($5.28 in chips)
Seat 7: SpielerABC ($4.72 in chips)
Seat 8: Orion469 ($6.30 in chips)
Seat 9: Luckey 1 ($0.59 in chips)
Hydonis: is sitting out
Hydonis leaves the table
SpielerABC: posts small blind $0.01
Orion469: posts big blind $0.02
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Orion469 [Ks Kd]
Luckey 1: calls $0.02
11ENDY5:30: calls $0.02
theheatwave: calls $0.02
PiJaMar: folds
bighoyle: raises $0.08 to $0.10
SpielerABC: folds
Orion469: raises $0.08 to $0.18
Luckey 1: folds
11ENDY5:30: folds
theheatwave: calls $0.16
bighoyle: calls $0.08
*** FLOP *** [Qc Kh Kc]
Orion469: checks
theheatwave: checks
bighoyle: bets $0.30
Orion469: calls $0.30
theheatwave: folds
*** TURN *** [Qc Kh Kc] [Js]
Orion469: checks
bighoyle: checks
*** RIVER *** [Qc Kh Kc Js] [7d]
Orion469: bets $0.50
bighoyle: folds
Orion469 collected $1.14 from pot

switch0723 · Apr 8, 2008

Yep, as i expected, by check calling, it looks like you have hit the king, since if you had a draw, you would definately have c bet the flop after 3 betting pre. You missed out on gaining a whole load of value, you at least have to bet that turn to try and bloat the pot a bit against a queen, jack or draws

c9h13no3 · Apr 8, 2008

switch0723 said:
Yep, as i expected, by check calling, it looks like you have hit the king, since if you had a draw, you would definately have c bet the flop after 3 betting pre. You missed out on gaining a whole load of value, you at least have to bet that turn to try and bloat the pot a bit against a queen, jack or draws

This is 2$ no limit. Do you really think your opponents are that smart? Could we be check/calling with a AQ or JJ to keep the pot small? How do you know he missed a whole lot of value? Maybe villain was betting with total air and if we bet, we get nothing? Your analysis is... bad. Bad analysis makes C9 emo T_T.

@ OP: Why didn't you bet the turn? If Villain had an OESD on the flop, it would have given him a pair of jacks on the turn. Additionally, you can get value out of flush draws on the turn, but you'll get nothing from them on the river. I suggest leading the turn for ~2/5 the pot.

shinedown.45 · Apr 8, 2008

Villian was LAG but was always cautious when entering a pot with me because of my unpredictable table image so I really believe I extracted the most I could have from villian.
A re-raise on the flop would have raised flags so I just called in hopes of giving him the impression I was the one on the draw.
I do believe my bet on the river was too high though....thoughts on how much I should have bet?

c9h13no3 · Apr 9, 2008

Hard to say. There's a good argument for checking here, since bluffs and broken draws make up a good portion of villain's range. Betting *anything* against those hands isn't worth much.

But then again betting ~1/3 of the pot on the river could allow you to extract some value out of middle pocket pairs, or possibly ace high.

With the check on the turn, this is looking more like a bluff or a draw. I think I'd probably check the river, trying to induce another bluff, or a value bet from a middle pair. We've shown weakness all through the hand, and betting the river shows a bit too much strength here.

shinedown.45 · Apr 9, 2008

c9h13no3 said:
Hard to say. There's a good argument for checking here, since bluffs and broken draws make up a good portion of villain's range. Betting *anything* against those hands isn't worth much.

But then again betting ~1/3 of the pot on the river could allow you to extract some value out of middle pocket pairs, or possibly ace high.

With the check on the turn, this is looking more like a bluff or a draw. I think I'd probably check the river, trying to induce another bluff, or a value bet from a middle pair. We've shown weakness all through the hand, and betting the river shows a bit too much strength here.

What size of bet could have I made at the river to make it look like I was trying to bluff?

robwhufc · Apr 9, 2008

c9h13no3 said:
This is 2$ no limit. Do you really think your opponents are that smart? Could we be check/calling with a AQ or JJ to keep the pot small? How do you know he missed a whole lot of value? Maybe villain was betting with total air and if we bet, we get nothing? Your analysis is... bad. Bad analysis makes C9 emo T_T.

No the analysis is good, If you are going to stack someone here they need to have either hit the flop (Queen), have a hand that they think is good (Aces or Jacks) or have a straight draw.

Bet the flop, who is going to bet the flop with a king (or 2)? Hardly anyone. So bet the flop.

switch0723 · Apr 9, 2008

^^^ At least someone understands, thank you rob

Maybe next time C9, you should look at the entire situation and the best play before critisizing the analysis of someone who is trying to help the op by giving the correct advice

soonerdel · Apr 9, 2008

slow play it as long as u can and get the max value possible

Jillychemung · Apr 9, 2008

I guess this is one area where we'd have to agree to disagree. My experience is that 9 out of 10 times the opponent will fold to your flop bet.

robwhufc · Apr 9, 2008

Jillychemung said:
My experience is that 9 out of 10 times the opponent will fold to your flop bet.

It's the 1 time out of 10 that's important. How many times is someone going to fire off multiple barrels into a board like that with nothing? If you check, he bets, you call (obv) then clearly alarm bells are going to ring and the hand will more than likely grind to a halt. I'd take a 1/10 chance for $5 over a 1/2 or 1/3 chance for 30 cents easy.

I'm waiting for T1riel to see this and say "bet the pot to guard against Royal Flush draw"

switch0723 · Apr 9, 2008

You will get action more than 1 time out of ten, but thats just hypethetical, although it proves the point. You may bet 9 times and pick up the pot right there, but the next time you do it and end up getting your stack in and doubling up makes up for all those other times. Therefore out of ten times, as a rough estimate based on your 1 in ten rule, every ten hands we make 5$. We also have the option to get paid off by draws chasing with correct odds, which builds the pot for us AND bloats the pot enoguh for us to get our stack in later on in the hand

That is much better than check calling since that way we will win .30 from standard players based on above example. That accumulates to $3 across ten hands, and that is providing villain is willing to bluff/ semi bluff

^^^ Although that is a really poor way of doing it as its full of assumptions and guesswork, but it kind of gets the point that i was trying to make across

EDIT: Rob posted while i was typing, but we at least have the same point coming across to show the most profitable way

F Paulsson · Apr 9, 2008

soonerdel said:
slow play it as long as u can and get the max value possible

That doesn't make any sense. If you don't bet, they can't call.

Jillychemung said:
I guess this is one area where we'd have to agree to disagree. My experience is that 9 out of 10 times the opponent will fold to your flop bet.

Out of curiousity, what other hands besides flopped monsters do you check on this flop after 3-betting preflop?

I won't agree to disagree, either. I think checking is just outright bad. It doesn't matter that he will fold 9 times out of 10, because we're not interested in the tiny pots we win the times we caught him raising preflop with air. We're concerned with getting him all-in, and we're playing with very deep effective stacks. We don't achieve that by checking, because unless he flopped a monster as well (i.e. QQ), he's not going to be making big bets for us on a board as scary as this. What are we hoping for? Checkraising the turn? How does that NOT scream "lol gotcha!"?

And that's even assuming that he'll bet the turn again, which really, he won't. In BTN's shoes I check behind exactly everything on this turn even if I did bet the flop. What we could maybe hope for is a draw to either get there or "find" itself on the turn, but backdoor flushdraws are really a long shot to hope for, and most other draws might just call here anyway.

Checking is a really bad way to build a pot. And this pot needs to be built.

F Paulsson · Apr 9, 2008

Clearly, everyone's posting the same thing at the same time. Fun stuff.

robwhufc · Apr 9, 2008

Did the 3 of us start typing the same post at the same time?

Edit - oh crap, again. I'm logging off!

switch0723 · Apr 9, 2008

great minds think alike as they say

Although i don't know who the 'they' are

c9h13no3 · Apr 9, 2008

shinedown.45 said:
What size of bet could have I made at the river to make it look like I was trying to bluff?

But what are villain's range that he would call you down with, just trying to catch a bluff? He's certainly not calling with ace high, or a smaller pair than J's if you bet hard on the river.

Also, I think any "bluff" type bet you make here is going to be hard for villain to call since you 3-bet preflop.

===================================

To all the guys who are arguing the standard "lead out with your monsters" line, I think there are some things about this situation that make checking the flop a possibility:

1) We're first to act, against 2 villain's, one of which is described as "Lag". Thus its highly possible that we'll induce a bluff by checking that we won't get by betting.

2) Check/calling allows another card to come off, and there are a lot of 2nd best hands that villain could make.

3) We're not building the pot as much by betting the flop, since its very very unlikely that we'll be getting raised. At 2$NL, no one is savvy enough to raise with a straight/flush draw on this board. Thus, no matter what we bet, we're only getting called. So why not let the villain bet for us on the flop?

4) We're not getting our stack in against anything but AQ, QQ, and AA, and AQ is the only likely holding given the preflop action.

5) Players at the 2$ level do not think "he wouldn't bet out with AK or KK here". They think "gee, he raised a lot preflop, and he's betting a lot now, he must have a good hand". Things are *really* that simple at the 2$ level.

Once we've called villain on the flop, we can take over the betting. Villain is unlikely to two barrel us, the jack gives AT, AJ, JJ, and TT something extra to continue in the hand with, and I think at this point we can bet out to get value out of all the hands that would check behind on the turn.

You guys just keep saying things like "They can't call if you don't bet" but I don't think that's a real good argument, and I think since we're holding all the K's, then getting our stack in is optimistic given the preflop action. We shouldn't be playing to get our stack in, we should be playing to maximize profit in the long run.

Winning 200 big blinds 1 out of 10 times is just as good as winning 40 blinds half the time. And usually when villain has a hand that's worth stacking off with, wether we check the flop or not, the money is probably going in. The only hand I can think of that would *possibly* raise us on the flop is [JcTc], and at this level, thats still very unlikely.

If we held KQ, or AK, or QQ, I would bet out all day, since there are still cards out villain can call us with. But in this case, I think Villain's range is just too weak.

robwhufc · Apr 9, 2008

c9h13no3 said:
To all the guys who are arguing the standard "lead out with your monsters" line

Nope, nice long analysis but you haven't swayed me. It falls down immediately - no way is betting into 2 players with a K (or2) on a KKQ board the standard line. The standard line is to check - run a poll on a freerollers site and i bet the vast majority of players would say slow play. The lead out line is standard if you showed the preflop agression and missed or partially hit the flop - AA, AQ, KQ, JJ, 10 10, 9 9, Ace high, anything that would want to defend against a flush draw (read through all of the hand histories here, if there are 2 of the same suit on the flop at least one poster will immediately assume that an opponent is on a flush draw).

What we've got to do in this situation is simply try and get an opponent to think that you haven't got a King and what they have got (hopefully a queen, maybe a lower pair) is good. That seems pretty obvious to me.

If you are looking to draw out a bluff, then lead out here! You haven't got a King, Kings don't lead out into those flops, so your opponent could decide that he hasn't got Q8s, now he's got a King and is going to push you off your weaker holding.

QQ is obviously going to go bust whatever happens (that would be the Grand Puba of all coolers!) but AQ, AA and AQ (again?!) - you are only getting all the chips in if you decieve your opponent into thinking you haven't got a King, and you can only do that on the flop. Likewise Jacks, 10's 9's a lone Ace could all still think (or hope) they are good.

Easy bet for me.

c9h13no3 · Apr 9, 2008

I suppose the place where we & the rest of the posters differ is the mindset of players at 2$ NL. All this semi-fancy "strong is weak & bet the flop to convince him we don't have a king" is probably great against thinking players. Your entire argument hinges on the fact that if we bet, we'll convince our opponent we don't have a king.

We're not against thinking players. We're against level 1 players. If this were $25 NL and up, you've made a decent argument for betting out. But at 2$ no limit players just look at their hands, and look at the board. Once in a while they'll bet if checked to on paired flops like this. But they're not going to think "Gee, he bet on the flop, he must not have a king".

At least that's my experience playing 2$ NL for 150 hours or so. Could be wrong.

feitr · Apr 9, 2008

I totally agree with C9. This is micro stakes, and most of you guys are giving the players WAY too much credit imo. At NL50+ sure the best option is to c-bet, because check-call after a 3 bet preflop absolutely reeks of a huge hand.

But at NL2 players simply are not thinking "wtf....why wouldn't he c-bet a flop like that after a 3 bet preflop" they are thinking "omg nice he checked so he must be scared of the board and i can bluff it".

Do you REALLY think that somebody at this stake would call a c-bet on that board if they check/folded after betting the flop? He obviously had nothing, and if he did have something he would have bet/called turn/river.

Only at higher stakes would i lead out here, but at higher stakes it would definitely be the right play. Ofc that is somewhat dependant on your table image (ie. if you c-bet almost always you could very well get alot of action with this hand by leading out...probably not at micro stakes tho).

Trying to argue that NL2 players are going to go into an indepth anaylsis of what you could have/why did you play like that is way off the mark imo

shinedown.45 · Apr 9, 2008

c9h13no3 said:
But what are villain's range that he would call you down with, just trying to catch a bluff? He's certainly not calling with ace high, or a smaller pair than J's if you bet hard on the river.

Also, I think any "bluff" type bet you make here is going to be hard for villain to call since you 3-bet preflop.

===================================

To all the guys who are arguing the standard "lead out with your monsters" line, I think there are some things about this situation that make checking the flop a possibility:

1) We're first to act, against 2 villain's, one of which is described as "Lag". Thus its highly possible that we'll induce a bluff by checking that we won't get by betting.

2) Check/calling allows another card to come off, and there are a lot of 2nd best hands that villain could make.

3) We're not building the pot as much by betting the flop, since its very very unlikely that we'll be getting raised. At 2$NL, no one is savvy enough to raise with a straight/flush draw on this board. Thus, no matter what we bet, we're only getting called. So why not let the villain bet for us on the flop?

4) We're not getting our stack in against anything but AQ, QQ, and AA, and AQ is the only likely holding given the preflop action.

5) Players at the 2$ level do not think "he wouldn't bet out with AK or KK here". They think "gee, he raised a lot preflop, and he's betting a lot now, he must have a good hand". Things are *really* that simple at the 2$ level.

Once we've called villain on the flop, we can take over the betting. Villain is unlikely to two barrel us, the jack gives AT, AJ, JJ, and TT something extra to continue in the hand with, and I think at this point we can bet out to get value out of all the hands that would check behind on the turn.

You guys just keep saying things like "They can't call if you don't bet" but I don't think that's a real good argument, and I think since we're holding all the K's, then getting our stack in is optimistic given the preflop action. We shouldn't be playing to get our stack in, we should be playing to maximize profit in the long run.

Winning 200 big blinds 1 out of 10 times is just as good as winning 40 blinds half the time. And usually when villain has a hand that's worth stacking off with, wether we check the flop or not, the money is probably going in. The only hand I can think of that would *possibly* raise us on the flop is [JcTc], and at this level, thats still very unlikely.

If we held KQ, or AK, or QQ, I would bet out all day, since there are still cards out villain can call us with. But in this case, I think Villain's range is just too weak.

This is the correct for the lower levels IMO but becomes weak as you progress through the levels.

robwhufc said:
Nope, nice long analysis but you haven't swayed me. It falls down immediately - no way is betting into 2 players with a K (or2) on a KKQ board the standard line. The standard line is to check - run a poll on a freerollers site and i bet the vast majority of players would say slow play. The lead out line is standard if you showed the preflop agression and missed or partially hit the flop - AA, AQ, KQ, JJ, 10 10, 9 9, Ace high, anything that would want to defend against a flush draw (read through all of the hand histories here, if there are 2 of the same suit on the flop at least one poster will immediately assume that an opponent is on a flush draw).

What we've got to do in this situation is simply try and get an opponent to think that you haven't got a King and what they have got (hopefully a queen, maybe a lower pair) is good. That seems pretty obvious to me.

If you are looking to draw out a bluff, then lead out here! You haven't got a King, Kings don't lead out into those flops, so your opponent could decide that he hasn't got Q8s, now he's got a King and is going to push you off your weaker holding.

QQ is obviously going to go bust whatever happens (that would be the Grand Puba of all coolers!) but AQ, AA and AQ (again?!) - you are only getting all the chips in if you decieve your opponent into thinking you haven't got a King, and you can only do that on the flop. Likewise Jacks, 10's 9's a lone Ace could all still think (or hope) they are good.

Easy bet for me.

This line for the higher levels is obviously the standard approach but then again will not work as well on a micro-limit table, so then allowing them a free card on a scary board is very inviting to them and if they hit the turn or river then it's time to fist pump.
If they don't hit then you are allowing them a chance to bluff the pot.

In no way am I disagreeing with anyones analysis as you are far more experienced than me but I believe there are certain limits where a slowplay is more likely getting paid.

Quads on flop

shinedown.45

Legend

Jillychemung

Stacks & Stacks

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK

switch0723

Cardschat Elite

shinedown.45

Legend

switch0723

Cardschat Elite

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK

shinedown.45

Legend

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK

shinedown.45

Legend

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

switch0723

Cardschat Elite

soonerdel

Rock Star

Jillychemung

Stacks & Stacks

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

switch0723

Cardschat Elite

F Paulsson

euro love

F Paulsson

euro love

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

switch0723

Cardschat Elite

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK

feitr

Legend

shinedown.45

Legend

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site