$4.40 NLHE MTT Turbo: Small blind defense

[HowToKapow]

Blinds were 200/400, villain in CO 3 bets and hero in the small blind 4 bet with KQ suited. villain calls

Flop comes 8 10 Q

Villain shoves hero calls, Villain shows AQ suited, wins the pot.

Could you have predicted this and if so how?

 

[PBG789]

Need much more info to analyse this properly. Stack sizes, bet sizes, suits of cards, players at table, reads on villain?

Simple answer is probably yes. What hand has he where he has bet, called a 3 bet and then shoved on that flop. AA & KK are unlikely as villain would have 4 bet pre-flop. AK is a possibility but is he really shoving AK (or any other drawing hands) on that flop given that hero has 3 bet pre flop. When villain shoves here I am, based on the limited information available, putting him on 4 possible hands TT 88 AQ or KQ with KQ being the least likely. Some of this analysis may alter slightly if more information is provided.

 

[HowToKapow]

Stack size of hero was 15k, villain was at 32k.
no reads on villain, 9 handed no backdoor on the board or anything

 

[PBG789]

Please look at some of the other threads on this forum to see how a hand should be posted. You still haven't given everything required to provide a full analysis - bet sizes are vital.

 

[Ambur]

Please look at some of the other threads on this forum to see how a hand should be posted. You still haven't given everything required to provide a full analysis - bet sizes are vital.

Agree, we need more information!

As played: I do not see eather that part of villain flop value range which we could possibly be ahead, after shove? - even if we assume he is unknown! Even X part of villain flop blufin range has ability to improve! We are probably beaten on flop and I do not really know, does hero hand can ever improve into best holding if we assume villain is not blufing? long shott imo


OP:
Give us more information! Structure+given dynamics (bet sizes included)+info about villain+all you got etc! And what was your plan on this hand anyway or did you had any at all??

 

[RamdeeBen]

$4.40 NLHE MTT Turbo: Small blind defense

Blinds were 200/400, villain in CO 3 bets and hero in the small blind 4 bet with KQ suited. villain calls



Flop comes 8 10 Q



Villain shoves hero calls, Villain shows AQ suited, wins the pot.



Could you have predicted this and if so how?

First question I have is what stack size was the original opener ? Either way, don't like your 4B from the SB with a hand like KQs. We are missing a lot of information like how big the pot is in comparison to your stack size on the flop but if you 4B a hand like KQs with 35bb and flop top pair second best kicker and face a donk shove, folding isn't really an option.

You did set yourself up for this though. You over played a hand which is often dominated in spots like this when still relatively quite deep in a turbo structure.

 

[Jacki Burkhart]

We need more info on the flop action too. It couldn't be a donk shove, because hero is in the SB so hero must have Cbet or checked on the flop.

I agree too much info is missing. But it is possible if stacks are relatively shallow to the blinds and you made a Cbet that might be pot committed. Without size of blinds and bet sizes I cannot know for sure.

And if you checked to induce a bluff from what you deem to be a spewy or bluffy player then you have to call off here, simple as that.

 

[Ambur]

But it is possible if stacks are relatively shallow to the blinds and you made a Cbet that might be pot committed.

Could you please explain it to me, because i really do not understand what are you trying to say or how this is related to original post, given information?

 

[Jacki Burkhart]

Could you please explain it to me, because i really do not understand what are you trying to say or how this is related to original post, given information?

I'm trying to say we don't know whether hero checked and then villain shoved; or whether hero Cbet and then villain shoved. That is vital information and depending on the size of the possible Cbet hero might already be pot committed with TPGK.

And if hero didn't Cbet but instead he checked; then why did he check top pair? Wouldn't it be to induce action from a weaker hand? Because if you check to induce a bluff then you better stick to your guns and call off with top pair.

 

[Ambur]

I'm trying to say we don't know whether hero checked and then villain shoved; or whether hero Cbet and then villain shoved. That is vital information and depending on the size of the possible Cbet hero might already be pot committed with TPGK.

And if hero didn't Cbet but instead he checked; then why did he check top pair? Wouldn't it be to induce action from a weaker hand? Because if you check to induce a bluff then you better stick to your guns and call off with top pair.

Thanks for your reply! Now is everything much more clear!