Game: $1/$2 (UTG $5 straddle) @ Casino. Max buy-in is $300.
UTG: 9♦6♦, $1000. Plays crazy and gets lucky a lot.
Me (middle position): K♠K♥, $550
Button: A♦K♣, $250. Decent player, plays tight.

Action:
I pre-flop raise to $25. Button & UTG call.
Flop: K♦ 10♦ 2♦
UTG bets out $40.
I call.
Button raises to $120.
UTG raises all-in.
I call.
Button calls.
Board bricks for both.
UTG wins pot with 9-high ♦ flush.


Now, after having some time to think about this hand a bit I think I made 2 mistakes:
1. I should have raised the $40 bet from UTG to $120, in case he was betting top 2 or a lower set. If I get re-raised by UTG I can be confident he has a flush.
2. After playing the hand like described above, I don't think calling an all-in is a good play since I have 10 outs (well, 9 after Button reveals a King) and I think in order to trying to hit my outs I should be getting 2.5:1 on my money which I wasn't.

Conclusion: I think I should have folded after UTG goes all-in. Thoughts?

Honestly you played it fine. It's live poker and people do dumb **** all the time. Unlucky on the cooler.

It's not easy to fold top set on any board but after btn raised your call, you know someone has the ace of diamonds. The UTG shove tells you someone has the flush so you can call and run it twice if allowed. You are getting 1250/435 or 2.9 to 1 on your draw. That's a clear call.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Sorry 1220/435 or 2.8 to 1, still a clear call.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Its too difficult to fold top set, its one of those spots where you know you are losing but can't gather the strength to act accordingly and muck your hand. I think your poker performance is made of many more improvable aspects, and many more evident decisions than this one. Here, like doug polk would say, was your time to die.

Easy fold. Not sure what you or these people above me were/are thinking.

This - UTG is just never 3-betting here without a monster. I actually expected him to have a higher flush. Just muck and wait for a better spot.

Definitely not a fold if you're sure the button will call.

My quick math says it looks like you're calling $485 into $1008, and you're less than a 2:1 dog when at least 1 opponent already has the flush.

The caveat is that you have to be fairly sure button will call.

Unrelated to your question but not including your opponents hands might provide less biased and more in depth answers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The livetard factor is huge, folding would be bad imo because you end up seeing a real cluster**** of hands. Perhaps at 2/5 or higher i'd agree with you though.

.....I was joking because it's such a lolzy easy call.

Call and get stacked by an obvious flush. Nice

Yes, an obvious flush from someone described as "crazy". Definitely never has QJx or anything like that or something like A3. Not to mention value hands like TT/22/KT.

Against their specific hands we're going to win 31.56% of the time. With the odds we need to be good 32.74% of the time. The hand isn't about whether he has the flush or not because poker doesn't deal in absolutes. It's about the odds. But hey, if you think a "crazy" player never ever ever bluffs, go ahead and make that (incorrect) fold.

Show me that maths

I did make a math error or two. One: I was only using button's stack as I meant to do two calcs but forgot by the end. Two: I did that math wrong anyways.

For the main pot we win $51.70
For the side pot we lose $93.36
Total: -$41.66

If you want the math done, you can do it yourself.

What I said wasn't even about the precise math anyhow. It's about dealing with "crazy" players. "Crazy" players do dumb things. When we have a strong hand against a very bad player who will get it in bad, we should get all in. I'm not advocating to get black AK in here as that's dumb. Here we have a hand that has a redraw if it's behind against a guy who can have worse for value and can have draws. Saying "lolz he has flush" isn't the way to look at poker.

From doing a basic version off the maths myself, seems like only profitable if button calls and he happens to not have any of our outs in his hand

I did my calc with button calling* and with his actual hand.

Just for the 3-way all-in**:
We call $185 to win $500 (their stacks) +$65 (what we've put in)
We win $565 31.56% of the time. We lose $185 68.44% of the time.

(.3156*$565) - (.6844*$185)
$178.31-$126.61=$51.70

*I seriously doubt button is ever folding after putting in $145 of his $250. If you want to adjust that to him only getting in 85% or some arbitrary number, go for it.

**If you're talking about both pots combined, I just showed above your last post that it's not profitable to get in against their precise holdings so I can only assume you mean the 3-way all-in.

Again, I'll say this because of the hard on you have for the math against the exact hands they have with no focus on anything but a flush. None of my posting was about the actual precise math but about the situation. Looking at the exact hands is a bad way of looking at poker. Let it go.

To add to the math.

vs. the exact hands V1 & V2 hold, OP has 31.6% equity

If you reverse Vs hands (it's very possible for either to have both hand types), OP wins the side pot unimproved ~60% of the time (big equity improvement over the scenario above).

When the big stack has TT, OP has 62.3% equity.

Big stack does not have a made flush 100% of the time. 3/4 of the time, maybe. More than half, sure.

Bottom line is, this is a fairly easy call.

I can't believe people are even debating this tbh