Just curious if I played this correctly; any advise would be very much appreciated! I'm playing $3-$6 limit at a local card room (The Caribbean in Kirkland, WA).

I'm UTG with KK; one person to my left is preparing two stacks of chips as though they want to raise, so I limp in and let him raise (which he did) with the intention of reraising when it comes around to me. Seat 5 3-bets (seat 5 has become very loose as he went on tilt about 30 minutes prior), and I cap.

In retrospect, I think my plan was to ram & jam if there's no Ace on the flop, and maybe check/raise if an Ace does hit, or even if the board is coordinated.

As it turns out I end up with the worst of both worlds as the flop comes A, 2, 3. Both I and the person to my immediate left check, and seat 5 bets. I raise and person to my left, surprises me by folding. I think I expected him to check/raise also. Seat 5 calls.

Sorry but I can't remember what the turn was except it would not have helped a straight or a flush, so I bet out and seat 5 calls again.

The river was K, and I was feeling better at this point. Again I bet out and seat 5 calls; I show my Kings and he mucks.

I think I played it right, but I'm pretty sure I was behind on the flop and turn; seat 5 almost certainly had an Ace and the only thing that saved me was the river King. I'm not complaining mind you, but was it right to be aggressive like that? He showed no signs of strength; I would have expected him to reraise on the flop if he had any Ace - so if he did have an Ace, maybe he had something like an Ace-5 or something weak like that. Then again, maybe he was drawing to the flush or straight and just missed...

So long as we're sure our neighbour is gonna raise preflop, then I guess limp/reraise is ok preflop?

Why is our plan to check/raise a flop containing the worst card in the deck for us? We just make it really easy for worse hands to fold and end up owning ourselves if crushed on the flop.

I'm ok with limp reraising if you have some dead on read that the guy to your left is raising, but you lose lots of EV if he limps or folds behind you.

You did not play this right. First off, c-bet the flop. People play so honestly on these flops that if you get raised you can be pretty sure you're up against an ace and can play accordingly. When you don't c-bet this flop you basically turn your hand face up as KK-QQ. Then you overrep the hell out of your bluffcatcher when you decide to c/r an Axx flop after limp-reraising pre. You realize he's not folding an ace, so if he's betting an ace then don't charge yourself to draw. Just call down, possibly folding the turn or river UI depending on your reads.

I might be overthinking it. I figured the limp/raise preflop was just taking advantage of the information my neighbor was giving me. The only problems I can think of with that are that my neighbor might not actually raise and I would miss the opportunity to raise myself, and that I might price others in who could draw to a flush or straight. It might be that I'm trying to be tricky in a situation that doesn't warrant it.

My thought about check/raising the flop was to protect my hand - there are only 3 of us in the pot, and I was really more worried about the person to my left. Seat 5 was on tilt, and could really have anything. I suppose by check/raising I was hoping to put them to the test. The scenario I was worried about was that the person to my left bets, seat 5 folds, I raise, and then the person to my left reraises. In that case I had planned to fold.

Was I making it too easy for the others to check, therefore giving them a free card? Should I have bet out and then folded on the flop if it was raised? Am I overthinking this?

Pre flop, i like the plan.

The flop I dont like. The turn i dont like, the river I do like.

If the tilter was likely to put in mulitple bets without an ace, check call and give him the chance to bluff.

when going for the limp reraise you just gotta be damn sure that it's gonna work. If villain is untricky and not a thinking player, and if you're sure he's gonna raise, then limping is ok. But only ok. The first time it doesnt work you're gonna feel like s**t. I usually like to save the limp reraise for suited broadways like JT in multiway pots, but doing it with big PP every once in awhile to mix up your play is ok.

+1

Once we established this guy as LAG/tilty we have made the decision to get to showdown. That being said, there's a good chance he holds an ace, and we would like to pay as few bets as possible to see that showdown.

I don't think kicking out the other limper is a big issue b/c we're probably in a WA/WB type scenario with him.

I still don't like it.

Worst case is you read him wrong and he only calls or folds (you only get to put in one bet). Best case is you get to LRR (you put in three bets).

Worst case with raising is he just calls (you put in two bets). Best cast is he wants to ride the tri-cycle, and you invite him along for a ride on your cap-wagon (you put in four bets).

I think I tend to overuse check/raise. In retrospect, I would have felt a lot more comfortable betting, and then either calling or folding to a raise (probably folding, to be honest) on the flop. A raise would have been ample evidence that I'm beat, if it came from the person to my left. Coming from the seat 5 tilter, I'm not sure - but I think I'm probably leaning towards a fold. If nothing else, this makes my decisions a little more understandable.

When you first posted this thread, I was talking to BBB on IM and I said, "that's a slick LRR". You did it exactly right and for the right reasons. As others have said, you need to be sure. You made the read and you went with it. You need to be very sure that your read is right here, but that's live poker.

One thing that the LRR should do is polarize your range. As a TAG, your LRR should scream "big hand". Of someone plays back at you, they are thinking that they can beat AA or KK or some other big hand (if they think at all).

If you think that one of them has an A, what is the equity of jamming your 2-out draw? Does anyone ever fold an A here? Can they fold any A for any reason?

No, it wasn't right to be aggressive, unless there was something else going on. It is a huge pot, and you can argue about calling down. To raise, you need to think your equity when calling vs. your equity vs. raising as well as the cost of seeing showdown via each line vs. the size of the pot. The equity could show that you should fold, it could say c/c to the river, or it could say raise; have you given any thought to the math? It is an exercise well worth doing.

If you haven't seen it, take a look at poker stove. It might be the first step in evaluating ranges.

I like the lrr in this situation, with your observation that the player to your left was gonna raise. You read; he did it; and, it got even better for you because of the 3-bet from McTilty and you got to cap. Sweet.

Now bet the flop. Sure, you're behind an ace; but, what's either player gonna do without one? Whadda ya think they have you on? Your flop check either looks like a ******ed AA or it looks exactly like what it is. You're allowing the tilted player to play perfectly against you 'cause your turning you hand face-up. Don't do it. A pf capper should be c-betting the vast majority of flops.

I don't like the call/raise pre. if he was preparing to raise so obviously that you could see it then he could have 3 bet you and then maybe Mr #3 wouldn't have come along with a probably iso 3bet. With less players in the pot you have a better chance of winning it and makes your decisions post much easier. anyway. not the most terrible move in the world.

Post flop, a check/raise is a disaster here. I'd bet/3bet on flop and if I get called am through with the hand. If I just get a call then am betting turn and possibly the river. There are so many players out there who would call you on flop/turn/river with QQ hoping you're just bluffing and I think villain was one of them.

Think about it. What hand that has an ace in it would 3bet pf and just call you on that board? NONE

This is very backwards. With AA or KK you want to trap as many people in the pot as possible for the largest number of bets. Poker isn't about maximizing the number of pots you win, it is about winning the most money possible. Trapping a large field with one of the two best possible holdings is a great way to do this. Sure, he flopped bad. Those are the breaks. Trying to clear out the field or raise your way to victory isn't the primary goal in limit hold'em. The OP's play was the best by far, as long as he could depend on the player behind him raising. Trapping a good number of people for a cap, priceless.

I just don't get what the bet accomplishes in this exact situation. Normally, against a sane player who isn't steaming and about to flip the table over, then i c-bet always with KK on an ace board. This way I gain info and can think about giving up before showdown if villain shows aggression toward me. In fact, against a tight player who was not capable of raising the flop on a flush draw I would consider bet/folding the flop getting about 17-1.

But the fact that dude is on tilt means we're never folding here b/c there is a chance we'd be laying down the best hand in a large pot. So let's get to showdown as cheap as possible, possibly induce the maniac to bluff along the way. By betting we allow him to play perfectly against us imo.

You could argue that, but also you wouldn't want to be playing against a large field of players holding hands like 9ts. they are simply not going to put money in the pot unless they have you beat.

A TAG approach blows hard after a table exceeds a certain level of looseness.

Wat?

I want to be playing against a large field of players holding any hand they want. You've got a hand that has huge equity against anything they want (other than AA). They are taking way the worst of it PF, and because of a very nice play, they paid a cap to see a flop. That is fantastic.

The bolded bit is silly. They're going to call with any piece and any draw. 1) they are loose. 2) the pot is huge and they have no choice. They end up compounding their PF errors. Also, 1/8 of the time, you flop a set and they're starting to draw dead.

I don't even know what this means. Who said anything about TAG? I'm saying, build a huge pot and win it unfairly often. Your equity doesn't decrease as fast as their contribtions to the pot increases.

Stop worying about losing a given pot more often and think about making more money overall.

Also, looseness is good for you as a winning player. The idea that no-fold'em is unbeatable is a myth.

I think it was mike caro who once wrote an article on limit where he said any time you are betting in limit with the best hand your best outcome is for them to fold because they are often getting the right odds to call.

the problem with using EV in this situation to judge your play is that some factors are not played into calculating it. For instance, it would be more difficult for you holding KK to know when you are ahead and when you are behind in a multiway pot. for 9ts on the other hand it would be far more obvious.

What this adds to is that holding KK in a larger field you are more prone to making -EV moves than you are holding 9Ts. Also, you are prone to missing on +EV moves because you weren't sure where you stand (like the op). In my opinion, this tells you that you are less likely to make -EV moves in a smaller field than in a larger one.

With every player that joins you to the pot your expected win rate drops. so the added +EV is not as large as it seems. and it is my contention that the loss in EV you experience in my explanation above offsets that +EV in many situations.

desperado, have you read 'small stakes holdem' ? by miller and sklansky

i think it would address some misconceptions that i think you might have about limit holdem

No, but I like helmuth's book. What misconceptions??

Are you serious here? Phil's book is an awful attempt at cashing in on his poker celebrity. It is full of junk that sounds good, but isn't close to fundamentally good poker. For a limit hold'em player, you'd do well to steer clear of this book. I had a buddy who was going to Vegas who pcked it up in the bookstore on the way to the airport. I flipped through his copy and suggested he bin the thing. Don't take my word on it:

This thread isn't the most clear, but the level-headed people posting dislike the book without fail.

Here's a small deconstruction of his book, play poker like the pros.

Try Small Stakes Hold'em, you won't regret it. By all accounts, Miller did a great job of repackaging HPFAP, making it apply more to LL games, and making the book more readable. The word on the street is that it is an improvement on a classic.

lol well i guess caro should stick to tells and forget about dishing on LHE strategy. If opponents folded every time we bet then there would be no money to be made and we would all be better off flipping burgers.

KK = the 2nd best multiway hand. Give me a capped pot ten ways plz.

dude just buy the book. after reading it you will look back at your foolishness and laugh about it.

Book is on the way. KK is not that great multiway. I'd rather have 44 multiway than KK. You can loose alot of money with KK playing it multiway. I don't care how +EV it is to go into the flop in a multiway pot with KK, after that you will be making some serious -EV moves. KK is a great hand but also is the kind of hand that you will make serious mistakes with.

And no, you will make more money in the long run if your opponents folded their draws every time you bet a flop simply because you are not charging them the right price to throw away their hand.

...and not a moment too soon.

by multiway I meant +4.

Is there a way to track the average profitability of KK in multiway pots Vs HU? I think the results will be startling.

I pretty sure you'd find them so.