$25 NLHE 6-max: River bet sizing? KK IP

[loafaBREAD]

We have zero bluffs here... I'm often in these spots with a 1 spr and I just make a jam the default bet size, but I'm not sure if that's appropriate.

Is AQ no spare calling a 1/4 pot bet? Are we targeting that?

I'm always 3-betting suited hands as bluffs pre, so we have a few flushes here too. But that speaks to my point- by the river, we have no bluffs...!

Yatahay Network - $0.25 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players


CO: 235.36 BB
Hero (BTN): 105.24 BB
SB: 100.4 BB
BB: 112.64 BB
UTG: 194.6 BB
MP: 129.32 BB

SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has K:heart: K:diamond:

fold, MP raises to 2.8 BB, fold, Hero raises to 8.4 BB, fold, fold, MP calls 5.6 BB

Flop: (18.2 BB, 2 players) 5:spade: A:spade: Q:diamond:
MP checks, Hero bets 8.28 BB, MP calls 8.28 BB

Turn: (34.76 BB, 2 players) K:spade:
MP checks, Hero bets 17.36 BB, MP calls 17.36 BB

River: (69.48 BB, 2 players) 2:diamond:
MP checks, Hero bets 71.2 BB and is all-in, fold

Hero wins 66.04 BB

 

[300HPGOD]

For this specific hand, I would say a little bigger bet on the turn makes things easier for the river as far as your decision is concerned. There will be a lot of hands that we beat that will call the turn even if you go 2/3rds there. Betting something like 22BB there makes your stack 66.5BB and the pot 79BB. There isnt anything you could do (without it looking weird) other than check or jam no matter what hand you had. The villain (hopefully) would also pick up on that and think your jam is weaker than what it is. In the specific hand here with this board and stack sizes I dont think you would ever be jamming with less than 2 pair here. Not saying bluffing with A9 here is bad but you would still have to get a two pair hand to fold (your target of bluffing) and thats not easy with the opponents we usually run into. Therefore, at the stack sizes we have a jam probably is two pair or better and that is why villain folded. Change that turn bet a little to make it more like a 80% river jam and I think you get a lot more calls.

All the above of course is easy to say when we see the hand and have time to think about it. In game, I probably would have bet the same amount you did and with that being said I do think it is best to jam there. Checking behind is too weak (there are hands that beat us, Im not discounting that although find it weird for them to open check the river if that is the case) and betting something like 30BB here should raise eyebrows. Best to just jam and hope villain sees some weakness in it or has AQ which I doubt they are folding in this spot.

 

[gustav197poker]

Preflop ok. On the flop we make a polarized bet to get called hands that can represent strong lines on the next fairways.
In this texture, rank V hands include flush draw combos, or some loose spade scale like Ts +. We block 3 combos: AKs and we want to protect our TPTK. But if we polarize, our range will also contain weaker hands, such as low pockets and some hands with implied equity. In such a case, our closest draws are 2 combos: KJs and 2 combos: KTs, obviously without spade blockers.
I'd bet 65-75% on the flop to put maximum pressure on the middle pockets 77-TT. And make the weaker hands withdraw.
On the turn we can check behind to load all the dominated hands that may be in range V. By not blocking any spade cards, our range is weakened in the eyes of a villain who called the flop with a flush draw. Therefore, we have now lost a lot of value and want to look like a defeated rank. This is because we have a position with respect to the villain. And we also allow MP to bet on the river, with his blocking-type hands.
The river ends up being a brick, so nothing has changed. So our bet here (if v does not bet) should be a small size (25-35%), to try to show a strong range and induce raises from a villain, who probably thinks he is in better shape than us In this way, in the end we will seek to maximize the value of our OTR bluff catcher.
Greetings.

 

[loafaBREAD]

Wow, I got two competing suggestions. I obviosly side with 300HP since his line is closer to mine, lol. Increase of turn sizing is the simplest solution.

But on gustav's:

Preflop ok.

On the flop we make a polarized bet to get called hands that can represent strong lines on the next fairways.
In this texture, rank V hands include flush draw combos, or some loose spade scale like Ts +. We block 3 combos: AKs and we want to protect our TPTK. But if we polarize, our range will also contain weaker hands, such as low pockets and some hands with implied equity. In such a case, our closest draws are 2 combos: KJs and 2 combos: KTs, obviously without spade blockers.
I'd bet 65-75% on the flop to put maximum pressure on the middle pockets 77-TT. And make the weaker hands withdraw.

Is my bet polarizing? I went for a less than half pot sizing here, though I probably could have gone for a third. I am betting here with a merged range, checking back very good hands (in this spot, trip Q with Q of spades, AQ with Q of spades, AK with K of spades...) and garbage hands with little equity (non spade/non diamond suited cons).

I think a bet that large never gets called by worse... a smaller bet puts enough pressure on those TT-77 hands, which are in a 3-bet pot oop otf, with two streets to go on a board that smashes my range. I want those hands to call, along with weak pairs, draws, or both.

I'm not sure what a 65%+ bet would accomplish... maybe It makes sense with A5s here, but generally i needn't bet that size. ...am I wrong? (you are better than me, so let me know!)

On the turn we can check behind to load all the dominated hands that may be in range V. By not blocking any spade cards, our range is weakened in the eyes of a villain who called the flop with a flush draw. Therefore, we have now lost a lot of value and want to look like a defeated rank. This is because we have a position with respect to the villain. And we also allow MP to bet on the river, with his blocking-type hands.
The river ends up being a brick, so nothing has changed. So our bet here (if v does not bet) should be a small size (25-35%), to try to show a strong range and induce raises from a villain, who probably thinks he is in better shape than us In this way, in the end we will seek to maximize the value of our OTR bluff catcher.
Greetings.

V can have 1 spade hands to go with a pair of aces that can continue. My real problem with checking turn is that we don't get enough value by the end of the hand. There are only a handful of fds V can have (perhaps we have a few more, but not much), but since V xcalled flop hes range is stronger and more condensed to top pair + holdings.

I guess I just disagree about this hand being a bluff catcher.

Also, I'm starting to think a smaller river bet might be best at least some of the time. We can do it with all of our value range, but since that range is wide( and strong, 2 pair at least).

I like a jam with this hand, and lower flush draws, since they allow V to have all kinds of 2 pair that can call. I also can't see how V can get away from AQ here, but there are many a nit at 25nl...!

 

[gustav197poker]

Wow, I got two competing suggestions. I obviosly side with 300HP since his line is closer to mine, lol. Increase of turn sizing is the simplest solution.

But on gustav's:



Is my bet polarizing? I went for a less than half pot sizing here, though I probably could have gone for a third. I am betting here with a merged range, checking back very good hands (in this spot, trip Q with Q of spades, AQ with Q of spades, AK with K of spades...) and garbage hands with little equity (non spade/non diamond suited cons).

I think a bet that large never gets called by worse... a smaller bet puts enough pressure on those TT-77 hands, which are in a 3-bet pot oop otf, with two streets to go on a board that smashes my range. I want those hands to call, along with weak pairs, draws, or both.

I'm not sure what a 65%+ bet would accomplish... maybe It makes sense with A5s here, but generally i needn't bet that size. ...am I wrong? (you are better than me, so let me know!)



V can have 1 spade hands to go with a pair of aces that can continue. My real problem with checking turn is that we don't get enough value by the end of the hand. There are only a handful of fds V can have (perhaps we have a few more, but not much), but since V xcalled flop hes range is stronger and more condensed to top pair + holdings.

I guess I just disagree about this hand being a bluff catcher.

Also, I'm starting to think a smaller river bet might be best at least some of the time. We can do it with all of our value range, but since that range is wide( and strong, 2 pair at least).

I like a jam with this hand, and lower flush draws, since they allow V to have all kinds of 2 pair that can call. I also can't see how V can get away from AQ here, but there are many a nit at 25nl...!

Exact. When you 3-bet preflop with a pocket low and you being IP, for example with 5-5, we can represent a wheel ace: A5. If we use low pockets for a preflop 3-bet range, we can recover the 4 eliminations of combos that that hand produces and add them to our range. So we can break down our low pocket into 4 possible combinations: 5-5; A-5s; 5-6s and 4-5s. To simplify the analysis, we can use our pocket for 3 representations: 1) Low pair itself. 2) Weak aces, or false aces and 3) Adequate low-denomination connectors.
In this way, we can add the combos eliminations that 5-5 generates to our range, and thus we can expand our margin of action preflop.
So we can call 1/3 of the time with our pure hand, to find the odds of setmine. We will be able to call 1/3 of the time when we represent suitable low-scale connectors. And 1/3 of the time we can 3-bet, when we seek to protect a weak ace for example: A2-A6, using 22-66.