0.5/1 NL 6 handed

effective stacks for everyone at the table ~$100

UTG is relatively loose player who raises to $3
CO calls
I have on the button :Kd: :Td: and I call
SB calls
BB calls

Pot ($13.75)
Flop :Kc:
SB checks
BB checks
UTG bets $10
CO fold
Hero ?


So here are my thoughts
1) Fold - not a good idea, I have great hand here and also a good draw.

2) Raise - The only hands I see calling are complete bluffs, AA which I am even money, AK, KQ, KJ also even money. KK, 99 and 55 I am a 35% underdog. JdQd, 7d8d, 6d7d, will call and I am way ahead. unsuited inside straight draw which may call but very unlikely. Plus it is slightly possible that the SB or BB are holding K9, K5, 95

3) just call and see what the BB and SB want to do and see what the turn will bring.

What's my move ?

-Alex

Raise to $27. You have equity vs a ton of hands your behind and no guarantee to get paid if you hit by calling. Calling allows you to take the hand away now with money in the pot and not allow him to draw cheaply to a potential outs, A9, 67. Besides all that your almost a coinflip vs AK and your a mile ahead of QQ+, AKo and AKs. Most of those hands are calling at least one raise now. Most hands that fold to a raise are folding anyway unless they hit a second pair or set on the turn

raisy daisy

Call.

Originally Posted by ATOTHEC101

Call.

Depends on what kind of players SB & BB are and whether or not I want them in the pot. I prefer calling with no reads, a weak kicker & position.

My thoughts.. Semi bluffs depend on fold equity of which it appears you have none. Also consider the blinds that are left to act.

Call

Call

better isnt folding... maybe like KJ but thats a very small part of his range.

Originally Posted by nutsinho

Call

This, when you get it in all you have is a fd so don't waste your pair.

Originally Posted by Silly String

Depends on what kind of players SB & BB are and whether or not I want them in the pot. I prefer calling with no reads, a weak kicker & position.

Not really, I'd call pretty much regardless of who the players in the blinds are.

saying call or fold is very easy. Can you defend your decision.

You see I think this is a very interesting hand. It is a way ahead way behind kinda hand. Most callers or raisers on the flop are either sets, the rair and unlikely 2 pair, or I am a coin flip against them AA, AK, KQ, KJ. Not many draws here as well except the inside straight draw. Plus I am not sure what the Blinds are thinking about. That is why I think calling is the best play, and re-evaluate on the turn. Damn it we are in position here.

Originally Posted by Beck

It is a way ahead way behind kinda hand.

It's no such thing! It's a way ahead or flipping kind of hand and we've even got position. It's the kind of situation good dreams are made of! Don't turn your hand into a semibluff nightmare.

i would think this would be more of a raise if u had like Ad9d

flop AsKd10d and he bets into you, you take away equity from a lot of hands with a good sized raise (not saying a raise here is always right but it has more merit)

where as here its different and a clear flat call, not much you lose too folds so just call against those and hope for a 10 or flush, and if your winning why raise when he cant have much that will catch up...

Raising here is idiotic.

You think you have fold equity when UTG cbets into 5 ppl?

The point of raising draws here is to
1) get better hands to fold (which likely won't happen, other than maybe KJ and very rarely KQ, given board)
2) Get it in with worse draws. This is unlikely, except perhaps QJdd or 78dd. You're not even that hot vs Axdd

Its also possible he's making a light cbet with a hand like 9T or something. Your raise gets him off these light cbets, which might choose to bluff a flush or something later.

CALLLL

I like how eloquently griffey put it.

Why is raising 'idiotic' when by raising you can get value from worse hands (nfd and smaller fds with gutters and stuff) that we can lose tons of value from on blank turns and sometimes we can also get him to fold AK/KQ/KJ/AA; hands you're flipping with or behind.

Our reasons for calling are that we have both showdown value and we can potentially pot control the turn if we don't think he's ever folding AK/KQ/KJ/AA and we have position which is nice.

If this were full ring or something and worse draws weren't as big a part of villain's range then ok, but utg is described as loose and this is 5 handed.

i think call or raise depends on how aggressive your opponent is. You mentioned he was loose, and if he is just loose preflop and passive post flop i like a raise in this spot. This lessens the chances that we get raised back and are forced to flip. if he is more aggressive id like a call in this spot coz then he might barrel off with a hand we beat or a hand we end up beating by the river. if we don't make any of our outs we could fold if it gets too crazy by the river, or we might be able to get to showdown for a cheaper price than an all in.

Using turn "pot control" as an argument for raising the flop hardly makes any sense. I'd agree that calling is probably best.

After reading this and looking over it knowing we only bet for value or as a bluff, I figure we can't be betting for value vs much and our hand is definitely to good vs his Cbetting range to be bluffing. I changed my mind, call. Let him make the mistake

Originally Posted by Ravageur

Why is raising 'idiotic' when by raising you can get value from worse hands (nfd and smaller fds with gutters and stuff) that we can lose tons of value from on blank turns and sometimes we can also get him to fold AK/KQ/KJ/AA; hands you're flipping with or behind.

The worse hands you are talking about in his range occur a fraction of the time because of how few possible combos there are of them. There's also a pretty good chance those hands get folded to a raise anyways. When compared to the times that you can't get them off AK/AA/KQ, raising accomplishes nothing, it's awful.

Originally Posted by dsaxton_1

Using turn "pot control" as an argument for raising the flop hardly makes any sense. I'd agree that calling is probably best.

Not sure if you're referring to my post, but pot control would be used as an argument for only calling. I don't think most standard agreessive villains are going to be flatting our raise oop all that much.

Originally Posted by Marshall28

Originally Posted by Ravageur

Why is raising 'idiotic' when by raising you can get value from worse hands (nfd and smaller fds with gutters and stuff) that we can lose tons of value from on blank turns and sometimes we can also get him to fold AK/KQ/KJ/AA; hands you're flipping with or behind.

The worse hands you are talking about in his range occur a fraction of the time because of how few possible combos there are of them. There's also a pretty good chance those hands get folded to a raise anyways. When compared to the times that you can't get them off AK/AA/KQ, raising accomplishes nothing, it's awful.

Really? K I could go i, but instead we can just agree to disagree on the premise that people at these stakes are folding combo draws and nut flush draws on the flop.

I originally posted this hand because I thought it would make a good discussion, and also because of a heated dispute I had with a buddy of mine, and if you don't mind I will post his remarks here.

The main problem with the FTR comments are that everyone seems to think that there is no fold equity. There is, and there is a ton.

Loose guy utg raises. The cutoff and button call. Blinds come along for the ride. Postflop check check cbet fold action to you.

This is literally the blueprint for a situation that has excellent fold equity.

The correct move is to raise to a total of $32. This makes all maths work correctly - regardless of if you are ahead or behind - and of course you are usually ahead.

Notice nobody in the forum mentioned getting the money in when you have the best of it. I'm not impressed.

Originally Posted by Beck

I originally posted this hand because I thought it would make a good discussion, and also because of a heated dispute I had with a buddy of mine, and if you don't mind I will post his remarks here.

The main problem with the FTR comments are that everyone seems to think that there is no fold equity. There is, and there is a ton.

Loose guy utg raises. The cutoff and button call. Blinds come along for the ride. Postflop check check cbet fold action to you.

This is literally the blueprint for a situation that has excellent fold equity.

The correct move is to raise to a total of $32. This makes all maths work correctly - regardless of if you are ahead or behind - and of course you are usually ahead.

Notice nobody in the forum mentioned getting the money in when you have the best of it. I'm not impressed.

He may not be impressed, but he also apparently didn't understand or read all of the responses. I specifically said "by raising you can get value from worse hands (nfd and smaller fds with gutters and stuff)". This, I believe, implies that we do get it in ahead some of the time. Also, of course we have fold equity, but most of us, including myself, believe that utg betting into 5 people (only 2 of which have checked) on a draw heavy flop suggests a very strong range and minimal fold equity. Your friends statement about raising to 32 being the only correct intrigues me (not saying it's wrong). If this is killing all action from worse hands behind us and only getting ppl to put more money in the pot with a set then i'm not sure how correct it is. Anyway, it's definitely a good hand for discussion and i'm still torn between call/raise, but i think it's tough to say that either one is absolutely correct.

so who is your friend?

stakes, site, etc?

if I had to guess he's a 2p2'er who's too caught up in a circle jerk to realize that you don't have to raise every time you have a piece of the board

certainly raising may be +EV, but calling is better.

/rant

Originally Posted by Beck

I originally posted this hand because I thought it would make a good discussion, and also because of a heated dispute I had with a buddy of mine, and if you don't mind I will post his remarks here.

The main problem with the FTR comments are that everyone seems to think that there is no fold equity. There is, and there is a ton.

Loose guy utg raises. The cutoff and button call. Blinds come along for the ride. Postflop check check cbet fold action to you.

This is literally the blueprint for a situation that has excellent fold equity.

The correct move is to raise to a total of $32. This makes all maths work correctly - regardless of if you are ahead or behind - and of course you are usually ahead.

Notice nobody in the forum mentioned getting the money in when you have the best of it. I'm not impressed.

lol

Is there fold equity? Yes

Is raising and getting it in plus ev?
yes

Is calling more +ev than raising and getting it in?
yes and I don't think its even close

The fact is your buddy probably means well but he's wrong no matter how convinced he is otherwise.

Originally Posted by Beck

I originally posted this hand because I thought it would make a good discussion, and also because of a heated dispute I had with a buddy of mine, and if you don't mind I will post his remarks here.

The main problem with the FTR comments are that everyone seems to think that there is no fold equity. There is, and there is a ton.

Loose guy utg raises. The cutoff and button call. Blinds come along for the ride. Postflop check check cbet fold action to you.

This is literally the blueprint for a situation that has excellent fold equity.

The correct move is to raise to a total of $32. This makes all maths work correctly - regardless of if you are ahead or behind - and of course you are usually ahead.

Notice nobody in the forum mentioned getting the money in when you have the best of it. I'm not impressed.

oh man this is absurd. Ofcourse there is SOME fold equity. Obviously when people say there is none, they don't mean none, but they certainly don't think there is enough of it to warrant raising.

UTG bets into 5 people, this is not a normal scenario. Even implying that this is a 'blue print' scenario to cbet, is kind of crazy. The board is super drawy, and I highly doubt any UTG betting here would EVER expect to bet on this particular board and take it down outright. He's expecting action of some sort, and he's probably even expecting a raise on such a draw board.

All of the talk so far has also focused on two people, UTG betting and hero raising. And focusing on whether or not we have fold equity. This doesn't even taken into account the times that he bets, we raise, and either SB/BB comes over the top of us with a set or something. Or the times that SB/BB jams, and then UTG jams too.

Obviously raising isn't bad, but calling is probably just better.

haha wow i didn't even notice that his friend said 'a ton' of fold equity. That's pretty awesome analysis. Also...why are we 'usually' ahead when we get it in on the flop? wtf is he basing this on.

I'm not impressed...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cl-beMYQ-K0

More reasons for calling: we keep someone with a lower flush draw in the pot, whereas if we raise he would fold. Or even better we get that person to squeeze if we call.

Id be more inclined to raise here if our flush draw was 7 hi.

Originally Posted by griffey24

Obviously raising isn't bad, but calling is probably just better

I can't believe you think like this. It is totally obvious that raising is very bad. Discussing this hand outside the beginners circle is a major waste of time.

Raising can be good in similar equity spots like this one where we don't know villains tendencies and are likely to be bluffed off our hand or make mistakes on latter streets. ie. some very good regs.

Not likely to be the case at 100nl.