my image is of a competent, sometimes aggressive player. i cover my opponent who has 220BB. villain is a thinking LAG and we play aggressively with each other.

1/1 NL 8 handed

Hero (UTG)
CO (220)

Hero is dealt KK.

Hero calls 1, folds, CO raises to 7, BTN calls 7, SB calls 7, BB folds, Hero raises to 27, CO calls 27, folds

game was very aggressive and a standard raise was anywhere between 5-10. i don't really like limp/3betting because it pretty much defines your hand. the thing is though that if i would of raised to more then 10 there's a good chance i would get no callers because it's weird and looks very strong, if i raise to 10 it might be 3-4way to the flop which kind of sucks. not sure whats the best play. when CO raises i think he is trying to steal but i know his continuation range is very wide. i should of raised higher.

Flop (65) Q,T,9

Hero bets 40, CO calls 40

so i avoided an ace but still the flop kind of sucks. it hit's CO's range pretty hard. CO slowplays sometimes so i'm afraid of that but he also knows i cbet almost every flop.

Turn (145) 4

Hero ??

Shove. Villain only has $153 left, checking here just lets him bluff the flush.

If the villain is thinking, he knows your range is KK+. Once he calls your bet on the flop, you're pretty much done.

If he can't crush your hand by the turn, you need to re-assess that he's a thinking player.

don't we want him to bluff the flush? are we getting called enough with hands we beat?

c/f turn?

--

what about pre limp/raising?

A pretty crappy spot. I would raise more PF myself, there's 22 in the pot and 27 makes it only 20 more to go...30-35 I think with this many in. We're deep enough that raises have to get a little bigger to deny odds to AK and smaller PP. With a raise to 35 there's 85 in the pot on the flop, shallower stacks makes our decisions easier.

As for the flop itself and how the hand is played.... Hits his 3bet call range all over the place. Not actually 100% sure what I would do. Probably leaning towards betting and stacking off after putting in >10% of eff stacks in pf.

Are you prepared to call his AI OTT if you check? What if he checks and a str8 card or hits the river? What if no scare cards comes and he bets AI? Are you b/f'ing or c/f'ing what might well be the best hand? Do you bet the river with a scare card knowing only a better hand calls? And so on and so on....

Bottom line for me, is this is the type of situation where checking always puts you to a tough choice, where betting always puts the touch choice on the villain.

IMO, yes you get looked up by hands you beat, but maybe behind some part of the time. Pair + FD/SD makes up a fair part of the villains range. We also can fold out hands that we do not beat like AA/QQ/TT, and small/middle flushes some part of the time.

Make it 30-35 preflop.

When this flop comes, with these stack sizes OOP, I'm checking almost 100% of the time. I either want to check/raise allin on the flop, make it to the river cheaply or if we end up check folding the turn then I don't want to put any more money in.


As played, check/fold turn

limp/raising pre is fine.

he is a thinking player and can easily float me here especially since this flop is so dangerous..

don't we need to protect our hand? and isn't there value we are missing?

yes this is a hard spot but i'm not sure a reason to shove is just to avoid tough decisions.. (well i'm not really sure what's going on here.. hmmm.. arrr in? )

--

how do you play an overpair oop with big stacks on a wet board versus a tricky opponent?

Just a tough spot, not much you can do to make it easier unless you just want to limp/call and be ready to fold the flop

Here's the reason that l/rr sucks against a thinking player. If you had raise pf in the first place, he'd have to worry about this flop hitting your range hard. As is, you've narrowed your range so much he knows he doesn't have to worry about the FD or a set. My guess is that since you don't know if you should stack off with an over pair, he doesn't either. Therefore, you have to think about what he thinks about you. Has he seen you make a big lay down?

Generally, 1/2 players are unable to lay down an over pair, so I don't think he'll bluff over 50% of the effective stack to try to take you off your hand often enough to make it worthwhile to continue.

Id check turn, and make an evaluation based on his bet, thats a crappy flop for our hand and as of that turn card we only really beat a bluff or maybe AQ JJ, however there I dont think there is any value in shoving, we have 1 pair

OK, let me restate it in the simplest of terms possible so you can get it this time... this time think about it before making a smartass reply

You likely have the best hand. You want to win the most money possible in this situation.

Again you will likely get called by many hands that you beat in the villains range, aka you make money.

Again you will likely fold out many hands that you do not beat in the villains range, aka you make money.

So if you are in a situation where one option is likely to make you money you should take it. If the other option leaves you in a situation where you may lose money you should not take that option...

sorry for that reply, was uncalled for and i appreciate your help

i think the main reason for shoving should be in order to charge his draws. a fourth club or another straight card would really finish the hand for me on the river if turn goes check check.
i don't think there are many hands that will call though that we have beat with only one card to go. can't see villain having AA/QQ/TT and even if he does releasing them, same goes with folding a flush.

--

action went check check. river was a blank. action on me. some kind of blocking bet maybe? i don't really understand good enough when a blocking bet is in place, only versus a player we are afraid might try and steal the pot from us but won't bluff raise?

Sorry if I was a little harsh, you kind of PO'ed me there.

Think of it as naming your price on the river. You bet an amount that you think you would call and no more. The amount should be somewhere towards the bottom of what the villain would bet here for value. Think of it as a situation where you would be happy to call $50 and no more, but if you check there is a high likelihood that the villain will be quite a bit more than $50.

The idea is that you have a lot of showdown value, but can not stand a lot of pressure either. So you try to freeze the action, betting enough that the villain has to think that its a stone cold value bet and be afraid to raise it while still "naming your price" while trying to squeak out some value and maintaining some FE.

It also has the added benefit at sslnl games that most typical players are simply not capable of bluff raising in a hand like this. The only down side, is that some (many?) are also so bad at valuing their relative hand strength that they might be raising for value with the worst hand, looking a lot like a much stronger hand than your's.