Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
You guys are so far over the top, calling KQs here is not a "huge leak", it's fine at standard LLSNL tables. The critical question is how often it gets threebet behind us, if the answer is "lol threebets they're those things you do with AA and KK right?" like it normally is, then calling is perfectly fine. You just have to be careful postflop, like if villain led 3/4 pot into the crowd here, then I'd just muck. If your fear is simply getting threebet, then do you also open fold KQs UTG? Are you under the impression that the difference is stealing the blinds? From UTG on a LLSNL table?
Weird sequence of events here. I can't say I'm in love with my hand but it's worth a call. Raising is out of the question.
KQs is fine as an open UTG+1 but not as a call IMO. Yeah you steal the blinds sometimes and that shouldn't be dismissed outright but mostly calling is bad because unless UTG is a LAG we aren't doing well against his opening range (ldo), and we don't have the initiative post flop making barreling tougher. In addition our range is capped, which anyone paying attention can see.
And if we suppose we get squeezed with TT+ AK with 7 players left to act there's about 2.7% chance per player or 1 - .973^7 = 17.4% chance we get squeezed and have to fold. That's not insignificant, and we should note it's more tempting for a player to 3-bet when there are overcallers so it's not directly comparable to the risk of being 3-bet opening UTG.
Certainly if I see an open and a bunch of folds vs an open and a bunch of calls I'm going to want to 3-bet more often in the second scenario since the overcallers usually fold, adding a lot of dead money to the pot.
I don't know if it's a "huge" leak to call particularly as KQs (but not KQo) does okay multiway, but certainly I think most people cold call way too many hands vs. a raise.
And I'm certain opening KQs UTG is more profitable than cold calling KQs UTG+1 despite your dismissal of the differences between these scenarios.