Trusting Your Instincts

[JohnBoyWWFC]

Is it always right to take those +EV situations even when you think you're a massive underdog?

Take today as an example. I'm playing a FR cash game and have KK, I raise UTG to 3x the Big Blind and get 3 bet, by a player I have around 500 hands on at these stakes who is a massive nit and has a 3Bet percentage of around 1%. Now, I've raised from Early position and know I have a tight image and villain has 3 bet, I do not put him/her on AK/JJ/AQs nor do I think she has QQ, statistically unlikely to have KK and even them I'm just throwing the money to the rake or she could have AA and I'm a 20% dog. Is a fold right here? I laid it down and will never know if I was right, but should you take the chance with pocket Kings here?

Another hand I played, there was a raise from UTG+1 and a call from middle position, I call the 3x raise from the cutoff with 55 and flop comes 56Q, lovely. The original raiser raises a tiny amount, middle p-osition folds and I re raise and the original raiser shoves. Now of course it could be AQ/KK/AA in which case I'm a dominant favourite, but the tiny flop bet followed by a shove made me think QQ for set over set. I called and villain has QQ.

There was another hand where I said out loud to myself what the villain had but called anyway because I felt I can't lay this hand down. I don't recall what it was but I was right again.

Is it wrong to call here, or should we always take a +EV situation. I'm not talking calling along with Middle pair because your opponent is some 97% VPIP crazy lag player who bets every street only to lose to his randomly flopped 2 pair with 83, I mean genuinely good hands, when your instincts simply tell you're losing, in a cash game, should you always take the odds and say well, I'm going to win here most of the time and just get it in?

 

[alaskabill]

As always, it depends on your read of the villain. In the first case, given your reasoning I think the lay down makes sense. In the second case, I also agree. You have bottom set. Obvioiusly the villain has something big to shove. I can't imagine its less than a bigger set.

 

[mikejm]

I think you play 2nl? If not then you can just disregard this but I don't think i would ever fold KK at 2nl even if you think this guy is really tight i still think its +EV to call here. As for the set again i don't think i would fold you said it yourself AQ/KK/AA and maybe even KQ you see someone at 2nl stacking off with so you have to call. Overall if you think its +EV than call

 

[bigpick76]

Is it always right to take those +EV situations even when you think you're a massive underdog?

Take today as an example. I'm playing a FR cash game and have KK, I raise UTG to 3x the Big Blind and get 3 bet, by a player I have around 500 hands on at these stakes who is a massive nit and has a 3Bet percentage of around 1%. Now, I've raised from Early position and know I have a tight image and villain has 3 bet, I do not put him/her on AK/JJ/AQs nor do I think she has QQ, statistically unlikely to have KK and even them I'm just throwing the money to the rake or she could have AA and I'm a 20% dog. Is a fold right here? I laid it down and will never know if I was right, but should you take the chance with pocket Kings here?

Another hand I played, there was a raise from UTG+1 and a call from middle position, I call the 3x raise from the cutoff with 55 and flop comes 56Q, lovely. The original raiser raises a tiny amount, middle p-osition folds and I re raise and the original raiser shoves. Now of course it could be AQ/KK/AA in which case I'm a dominant favourite, but the tiny flop bet followed by a shove made me think QQ for set over set. I called and villain has QQ.

There was another hand where I said out loud to myself what the villain had but called anyway because I felt I can't lay this hand down. I don't recall what it was but I was right again.

Is it wrong to call here, or should we always take a +EV situation. I'm not talking calling along with Middle pair because your opponent is some 97% VPIP crazy lag player who bets every street only to lose to his randomly flopped 2 pair with 83, I mean genuinely good hands, when your instincts simply tell you're losing, in a cash game, should you always take the odds and say well, I'm going to win here most of the time and just get it in?

lemme guess he had 4 7 off suit

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

Lol, funny you should say that, I lost KK to 47o earlier today! Good times. For the record, yes I have been playing 2NL, started this month, just today made it up to the BR for 5NL so will be playing that tomorrow. But as someone who is new to cash and hoping to move up, I was looking at the idea across a number of stakes. I don't see what the difference is from somone who only 3 bets a tiny percentage of hands across any stakes. People say oh it's only 2NL, ship it, but I'd be much more comfortable shipping QQ v one player against another.

 

[megl]

As said by alaskabill and mikejm, I think you made a good laydown of your kings but should have called/put villain on a wider range in the second hand (regardless of the actual result).

Most important thing to extract from your post though is not the actual result of two specific hands; it is to recognize, sustain and apply your apparently good handreading skills. Of course math and odds apply to playing a certain hand against a certain villain, but hand reading also draws on so many subtle fragments of experience with that particular villain, table dynamics, timing tells, many small pieces of data that your mind processes on a subconscious level without you 'knowing' you're doing it. That's what constitutes the thing you call 'instinct' (see, imo 'instinct' is real and based on real data, not just some magic unexplainable mindreading mumbo jumbo) and if, as you say, your 'instinct' (your mind's ability to subconsciously collect, correlate and apply relevant data) consistently makes the right 'guesses' of your oppinent's hands, you should certainly not ignore that with arguments like 'objective odds calculations say I should call his shove even though i KNOW I'm beat'. That's just like saying 'I will only use some, not all, of the available information to make my decision in this situation' (i.e. you will only use the information that you are consciously aware of, and disregard your subconscious mind's contribution).
So, congratulations on your good hand reading skills, keep honing your instincts, trust them and use them

 

[TIGERSTUMP]

if your layin down kk in cash game pre flop 2 a 3bet even 2 a tight player at the table ...YOUR PLAYIN 2 TIGHT AND WAY 2 PARANOID,, its a cash game get some kahunas even if your up against aa u should see a flop,,,and lead out see were u are,,in a cash game u will get 3bet with all kinds ov hands if table thinks u are a tight asss player

 

[Salty Mouse]

At least in your second scenario, it would have been a masterful fold. But I don't see how you can get away from your set with that flop. There's exactly two combinations of hole cards that has you beat (QQ, 66); any other combination and you have him/her dominated.

The fact that you had it figured out your opponent had you set-over-set is a testament to your reading skills. But I'd certainly have difficulty getting away from that hand post-flop.

 

[xdeucesx]

honestly john, at 2-10nl, 99% of players aren't paying enough attention to notice ideas such as "table image/dynamics", there playing their cards only...meaning they are playing at a "level 1" state of mind

preflop, never lay down kings at these stakes, ever...I know it may seem like he's the biggest nit w/a 1% 3 bet, but still at 2-10 nl, I would still never lay it down

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

Fair play. I would rarely do it, but I reckon I was right on this occasion.

Another example I saw on TV was 2 guys were heads up in the final of a World Open, it was Sam Trickett and Yevgeniy Timoshenko and Timoshenko got check raised all in on the river with Top pair and a weak kicker. Now, in this spot, he's clearly beat, Trickett knows he can't push him off anything because he's pot committed, but why call for all your chips because the odds say you should when you're clearly behind. It was a terrible bet on the river anyway, but I don't see why he calls almost saying, fine you got me, well played. It's almost like he "can't fold" and this seems to be a common saying in poker, I had to call, I couldn't fold there, even when people are sure they are beat.

Just some thoughts.

 

[baudib1]

because sometimes people will have bluffs when you figure they can't possibly have bluffs.

 

[_dogmeat]

Gut feeling, instinct, intuition... call it whatever you like, it's all based on facts. Hand reading is as much logic as it's intuition.

And you have to combine stats and intuition to be able to make the correct calls most of the times. You can't, as someone said before me, simply ignore facts. You have to take the whole picture into account. If the "gut" tells you something isn't right with your reasoning, you probably know it on an intuitive level, but just can't quite surround it with sound logic. This is where, IMO, the best plays come into action. Most of the time it will be 3rd or 4th level thinking, though. So no worries for now

 

[xdeucesx]

never fold pocket kings preflop ever in the micros...evar

 

[dufferdevon]

While I agree with what has been said so far, as to never laying down Kings preflop you can get a sense from some players and just know you are beat.

The hard part is to listen to yourself, even though the odds, hand ranges, pot odds say to call. After playing hundreds of thousands of hands you will get a sense of when you are beat.

 

[ben_rhyno]

never fold pocket kings preflop ever in the micros...evar

This, or sets

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

Yeah, i wholly disagree on that point, but I guess it's an example of my point, people say get em in, you'll be ahead more often than not, but I could have saved like 6BIs this week by folding KK pre cos they ran into AA and not jus all those times when they did, but those times when I felt I was beat.

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

And, yeah I folded KK on the river today when there was a King on the board. Bad fold Ben?

 

[tenbob]

Stop outleveling yourself, dont fold sets or KK pre-flop.

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

Seriously? The guy was calling on a 2 spade flop and the river brought 4 to a straight and the 3rd spade? I don't know what outleveling means but I don't think you can make these blanket statements. Newbies gonna come here, read that go to micros and get owned if they just call call call with bottom set on a 4 to a flush board or times when it's just bad to play those hands.

 

[NEWTDOG101]

Stop outleveling yourself, dont fold sets or KK pre-flop.

I agree!!! You are selling yourself way to short. KK is not a hand to fold pre-flop. In some cases I have seen this done in a PL game, but NL, not a chance I would fold before a flop. But hey that's just me.

GL

 

[TylerN]

Is it always right to take those +EV situations when you're in the micros and people suck horribly?

fyp and yes

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

You didn't really fix my post since I'm talking poker in general not just 'the micros' as everyone seems to be hung up on. It's like if someone is running 7/6/1 Vpip/Pfr/3bet they have the same ranges whether it's 2NL or 200NL.

 

[TylerN]

yes i did. The majority of nits are willing to get it in QQ+,AKs+,AKo in which we're ahead of that range 57% to 42%

 

[JohnBoyWWFC]

So if I know for a fact that this player isn't stackin off with QQ, since I've seen him flat a 3 bet with QQ and take a flop a number of times, then what?

 

[TylerN]

then your flipping 49% 51%. And for the MOST part you can't entirely exclude QQ from there range so the times that they do show up with QQ makes up for it. It's just not profitable to fold KK pre and I know you have your "instincts" but i just advise not too