At this point, you're just arguing reads, and arguing reads is basically arguing opinions.

You can assign % to confidence level of your read, and then make necessary calculation using that information.

Agreed. If it makes any difference, my thought process/adjustments throughout the hand were:

1. Isolate tilting UTG straddler with a stronger range than his

Once I got three callers behind me, new plan becomes

2. Play fit-or-fold on the flop mostly check/folding

Once SB squeezed it became

3. Determine likelihood of SB squeezing (previous squeezes, smallish bet sizing, uncomfortable look, etc.) and asses merits of a 4!, repping KK+

Ultimately I couldn't pull the trigger, but I just want to express that I felt like I was aware of the situation and adjusting my expectations for the hand on the fly. I wasn't going to get involved in some huge pot if I flop a K or anything. K9s OOP sucks, no doubt about that. But it's only RIO if you allow yourself to lose a big pot with it.

So it isn't a -RIO hand if you only lose small pots?

I don't really understand the point of your comment.

It's only RIO if someone else has a Kx hand where x>9 and we pair our K.

It's not a RIO hand relative to the target's hand which is ATC.

Like I said, I'm not playing K9s to play the field, I am targeting UTG. It didn't work. I'm not gonna get too worked up over it.

Well, you said it isn't a RIO hand if you don't lose big pot with it...

Anyhow, -RIO is -RIO because you can't avoid -EV spots while holding those cards.

If you can avoid those -EV spots, then they're not -RIO hands.

So I don't know why you toss in RIO and then say that you can avoid -EV spots.

Anyhow, we're kind of just stretching this thread now...

you'd have to have a pretty big skill edge over the field or have exceedingly tight players behind you and bad players in the blinds for opening K9s UTG to be good, even 7 handed. it's not impossible, but youre gonna be making a mistake more often than not when you attempt this - particularly given that you just moved up (and that you consider 4b/f to 500 to be a viable option). i would recommend that you fold KTs as well.

you really, really should not ever put half your stack in pre and then fold (esp when theres other dead money in there). this is about as close to a rule that "it depends" doesnt apply to as you can get in poker. as wj94 pointed out, it's a tough spot in terms of figuring out what your 4b response should look like because if you do anything other than minraise, you are committed with a lot of your hands (and even minraising brings you close). having your 4b size be a jam seems fine to me here because of this, and i also think you'd be fine 4betting to like 310 (a size that it looks like he has some fe with a 5b jam) with a pretty strong range of like QQ+/AK/AJ/ATs.

fwiw the title is a little bit wrong. this wouldn't be a semi bluff, it would be more like a stone cold bluff (a semi bluff is when we have equity to hit a hand like a FD or OESD) maybe the mods can change it?

what range does K9s have 0% equity against aipf (or seeing a flop)?

^ Jvds, I am never actually considering 4!/folding, I just threw it in there. If I 4!, I am calling it off.

And for the 1,154,122 time I am 4th to act in a 7 handed table, squarely in MP as I have 3 in front and 3 behind. How can I be UTG if there is already an UTG straddle?

The table dynamics were such that I thought I would buy the button a good % of the time based on previous raises and the average # of people that have been going to the flop. This point has been debated to death and isn't really all that relevant. It didn't work this time, it worked other times.

you never have "0% equity" I was referring to the terminology only.

"A "semi-bluff" occurs when you bet after the flop or turn with the hope that you are not called. However, if you are called, you have outs that could give you the best hand by the river."

http://www.poker-king.com/dictionary/semi-bluff/

Seriously???

No dude, just no.

okay, my mistake then. still, 4b/calling K9s isnt really a great plan either unless he folds at an absurdly high rate to the 4b.

if there is a straddle and then you are first to act, you could just as easily say that you are UTG in a 3 blind game. this is kind of semantics though, the point people are making is that you act first preflop, and have 3 players who act after you to whom you are OOP (the same scenario as if you were UTG 6 handed). having 3 players in the blinds can cut both ways, since they have an additional opportunity to squeeze, but there is also a higher chance you will end up HU IP (and there is more dead money to pick up pre).

the point is actually very relevant. as i noted before, one of the times in which you might be able to profitably open K9s UTG is if the players behind were extremely tight. the fact that you got 3 callers is bayesian evidence that these conditions did not exist, although it is certainly not dispositive.

nailed it.

I tried to stay out of this post.../ full grunch....

The fact that v1 is squeezing out of the sb over your ep open into 3-4? (Idk exactly how many) players behind him... Dude this is never light and if it is he is a ****** and is losing his stack shortly anyways... And your probably getting stacked if you 5! Him if not now then shortly down the line..

If you want to experiment with light squeezing for bluffs look at your spots and choose them based on how weak/strong the players are and positions they are in when raising calling etc.... This doesn't seem to be one of those spots, with this particular hand..

It doesn't really matter when V has a big hand if he simply folds too much. Based on the calculations already done he needs to fold 2/3rd of the time which is a significant number of combos, but definitely possible. I don't know if you would consider that maniacal. If I was in the SB's spot and had a strong image I would be squeezing pretty lose. The SB doesn't seem like he has a strong image, but if he's still an aggrotard and does it anyway then he needs to be squeezing something like 99+, ATs+, KQs, ATo+, KQo which is about 8.3% of hands and calling off only JJ+, AKs, AKo which is about 2.7% for us to show a large profit. If he is instead squeezing a polarized range then it would also include the JJ+, AKs, AK he is calling off with and include something like A5s-A2s, JTs-54s, QTs-64s+ as bluffs for a similar 2:1 bluff to value ratio.

If V can be identified as having a 2:1 bluff to value ratio then it is a very exploitable spot and shoving will show an EV of around $100. This is a very large +ev spot and can allow for some combos of the other players slowplaying big hands and him bluffing a little less. I'm not entirely convinced that this V has 2:1 bluffs in his range, but the result that he has 99 does definitely give evidence that it could be a +ev shove. As for hero's hand in this spot, opening K9s from mp is an exploitative play and the conditions might not be appropriate for it, but once he reaches the spot to 4bet or not his hand is not that important.

Like I said earlier, against JJ+, AKs, AK:
K9s has 26.0% equity
AQo has 28.2%
A5s has 30.7%
72s has 24.0%

Each extra percent of equity in this spot is worth about $7 ev since is only applies when you are called. So if you identity this exploitative situation when someone is 3bet squeezing too much you can shove with ATC. There is no need to look at your hand and say K9s is too weak while KTs or KJs is strong enough. It doesn't make a big difference and if it is that close then you probably shouldn't bluff anyway since even if he folds 2:1 it is still a high variance spot. You are going to get stacked about 25% of the time. That being said if you are going to pick a hand to bluff with suited aces are the best candidates.

showing the 72s when successful is +EV too.

So I guess you guys are saying the amount of dead money and % chance that the 3! folds has way more of an impact on the EV than our actual hand? But if we are going to do this, we are best off doing it with an Axs hand?

And if that is the case, and we suspect he is squeezing wide, we would be better off flat calling with something like AKs while 4! bluffing Axs (not that we would/should be opening Axs UTG+1, but that's beside the point).

Yes. Actual hand strength will matter more if you're getting called really wide. Yes, Axs performs reasonably well against a tight range. Also, Ace blocker is better than a King blocker for greater FE.

Opening A6s is better than opening K9s.

AKs is a whole nother kettle o' fish. It is an ideal hand for this move due to blockers and has way better equity against a tight range than any other unpaired hand.

Your hand doesn't matter much if 1. he only calls with a tight range since you are going to have two undercards or be dominated most of the time anyway. 2. he needs to fold most of the time since your equity doesn't matter when he folds. If these conditions are not present then your hand does matter, but you probably can't bluff with anything other than AK and AQ anyway if that is the case.

With the pot already this large AK is an easy ship if V still has the wide range that we were working with previously. It is better than flatting and attempting to play postflop since the SPR will already be too small under 2. Shipping will get him to fold out lower PPs like 99 that have 55% equity. You dominate hands like AQ and KQ, but you are only going to flop the dominating card around 12% (I forget the exact number), so there isn't much value. The only time I would flat is if I'm confident that V is firing the flop 100% of the time and I plan to call down or ship the flop with AK high for value against AQ and AJ.

The reason to ship AK though is that it does have a significant equity advantage over the other hands against his continuing range.
Against JJ+, AKs, AK:
AKo has 39.8%
AKs has 42.8%
This means that even if he is folding much less than 2/3rd of the time you can still have a +ev ship. As you can see the difference between AKo and K9s is huge compared to the difference between K9s and AQo against this given calling range.

All of this is given that V has a wide squeezing range obviously. Against a live nitty 3bet range of only QQ+, AKs, AK then fold anything except KK+.

Obviously if V has a wide 3bet range and is willing to fold, then frequency is the answer, and you can do the raise with ATC.

Miller's book touched heavily on this approach.

Really enjoyed reading this thread, solid strategy discussion other than what other's dictate as standard.

FWIW I think isolating a loose-aggrotard with K9s is completely fine when you're able to play very comfortably post-flop

Agree, but his sizing is bad. It is 3.5x.

This is live poker. If your objective is to isolate a tilting spew tard. Then let's isolate him. Make it 5x. If spew tard won't call 5x. Then we need to be folding.

$35 in game described, is begging to get 3b! Or very least go multi-way.

Opening to 5x should at least throw table for a loop. Also should tighten up there 3bet range. When spew tard is on tilt. Calling $355 or $50 pre isn't gonna change there calling range much.

F.w.i.w

I am folding K-9 in this dynamic. But would be opening with it alot with different table dynamics. It by no means is a hand to expect great value from EP though.

I honestly don't have a light 4bet range.

Highly doubt I am getting exploited because of it. Also flat more 3 bets than most though if we are 20BB deep

You're not necessarily getting "exploited" due to not having a 4! bluffing range at these stakes, but you're missing out on various +EV spots against opponents who have a high frequency of 3!/folding.

I do agree though if the goal is to isolate I'd likely size up, also helps our FE to get the pot pre uncontested.