PokerStars - $0.25 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

SB: 100 BB (VPIP: 23.18, PFR: 17.03, 3Bet Preflop: 3.39, Hands: 1,410)
Hero (BB): 106.48 BB
UTG: 100 BB (VPIP: 24.22, PFR: 20.27, 3Bet Preflop: 6.17, Hands: 229)
MP: 124.72 BB (VPIP: 21.12, PFR: 15.32, 3Bet Preflop: 7.77, Hands: 489)
CO: 80.32 BB (VPIP: 45.83, PFR: 4.17, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 24)
BTN: 101 BB (VPIP: 35.45, PFR: 28.76, 3Bet Preflop: 11.88, Hands: 1,211)

SB posts SB 0.4 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has K A

UTG raises to 3 BB, fold, fold, fold, SB calls 2.6 BB, Hero raises to 12 BB, UTG calls 9 BB, SB raises to 100 BB and is all-in, Hero - ?

Would expect some heavy artillery.

Ship it.

this line screams small pocket pair <TT. You're probably gonna be around 45% but you're getting a slightly better price so call.

Nothing that crazy. Easily could be PP JJ and under, QQ at some cases as well. Also, KK and AA can be there at non-zero frequency. Most of the time I expect AK and PP round 9s, Ts or Js. I'd say, easy call.

Pretty easy all in vs a backraise.

This. I have never seen a monster in these spots.

Weird line from villain I think we have no choice but to call

Flat pre

Sent from my VS870 4G

No. that would be an absolute waste of a good hand. a raise and a call, you have AK and just want to call to see a flop 3way? That's not good poker. Raising allows you to usually blow at least one of them out of the pot and you'll win postflop much more often.

think this is an easy ship since utg just flatted our 3bet. SBrange screams <TT so

Is anyone folding when utg 4bets/shoves ?

We certainly shouldn't be 3bet/folding AK. Flatting pre is reasonable in this spot imo, Although 3bet/5bet is certainly possible as well if you think UTG is capable of 4bet bluffing here.

flatting would be horrendous

Its defiantly a +EV spot to call as you are really never behind here, although its just as unlikely you are ahead, theres is defiantly enough overlay in the pot to make taking a flip here +EV. however if you want to give up a little equity to save the variances and not go on tilt if you are that type of player then that makes sense. However, if you want to be a poker player you have to take these spots.

3b must be better than flatting, we take initiative giving us a much better chance to win the pot and we will likely be against 1 rather than 2 opponents. Easier to put our opponent on a range.

Plus SB probably has junk, and being OOP 9/10 you will get a fold from SB, giving us free money.

When he shoves, he obviously doesn't want to see a flop OOP with 2 opponents and fancies squeezing us with a 27BB pot.

I seriously doubt SB planned the hand to go this way, you wouldn't expect a 3bet from the BB. If SB really wanted to get it in pre he would have 3b himself.

Calling is absolutely atrocious in a spot like this. you just waste your hands potential. two thirds of the time you won't improve OTF and you'll most likely fold. 3betting on the other hand will be much more profitable in the long run.

Seems like atrocious and horrendous are the two most popular words on this forum.

Results:

did he just lose a big hand?

UTGs play is lol worthy to say the least

I keep seeing these kind of plays and hit a mental contradiction in my head. I can see why we do it, one hand it makes sense but on the other hand it doesn't.
When SB 4 bet ships after a UTG over call, short of SB being a agro tard maniac are we ahead often enough of his default range?
Any PP, AK and possibly but unlikely AQ. At a horrible stretch KQ and AJ.
SB call after the initial raise then shoving is a weird line but again, unless he's a maniac, I'm not feeling good about it.
But it's a flip! You all say, it's +EV and profitable!
Errr...
No.
Well +EV, this is true, profitable? No it isn't.
If we assign villain with a range of any PP and AK with occasional AQ and never folding and we played this over a large sample it's Villain who "profits", who "makes money" even 22, the closest to 50/50, short of each opponent having the same cards is as close to a 50/50 you'll ever get and even then 22 pushes ahead a little.
Now being +EV is clearly not the same as profitability, it just means calling is better than folding, we lose less. I'm not looking to lose less, I want to win more.
But then we hit the conundrum. Fold we lose more money than if we call (Maybe?), call and we're behind and still lose, long term (Unless maniac).

I suppose the point I'm trying to get across and the question is, is it inherently wrong to only want to shove the "majority" of my chips into the middle when I have the edge?
In this scenario, you are behind (Without looking at spoilers I'm confident we're not ahead), even if marginally, but if I wanted to play cards where I was marginally behind to lose less, I'd play Blackjack.

Ship the nickels imo

have to call, expect to see TT-QQ a lot given lots nits flats QQ in sb pre vs UTG.
and AK the other half of the time. and occasionally we are ahead if SB just decide to jam KQ/AQ


edit: lol UTG's call is just beyond awful

@Gunblade, Shoving with AK is always going to be a flip here. You are behind everything basically, besides hands like AQ or KQ.

You need 43% equity to call here. And you have 43% vs ALL pocketpairs and AK (22+, AK).

If they both shove you call 88 to win 212, which means you need around 30%. And again - vs two ranges of 22+,AK you will have exactly 30%.

Basically its Ev 0.

If you expect someone to shove KJ then it changes greatly of course.

Everyone say easy shove he has TT- . We still have only ~43% vs TT. Its a shove but its not like I'm extremely excited about it.

Never expecting to win millions here.

It's all about odds vs price you're getting. We need 40% but we are getting 43%. It's clearly a profitable call, even though you will lose more than you'll win considering he has a pocket pair.