PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mark's ****. #4 - Play of KK

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mark's ****. #4 - Play of KK

    In ANALYSIS #4 Mark stated that it was wrong to slowplay pocket kings from late position after to small bets. He suggested that it was better to re-raise for an amount that would effectively claim the pot - all in raise, etc.

    Is there no way( or wrong to try) to get more out of pocket K's? I know an Ace will flop 1 in 3 times and seriously injury your KK, but 2 in 3 times no Ace appears and KK may holds up. I hate to have as a goal the winning of a small bet (or just the blinds)with pocket KK's. I feel they are worth more.

    What would be wrong with a medium size bet designed to eliminate just drawing hands, ie, small pair, suited connectors, but have big cards continue to contribute to the pot, ie, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, KJ, KT, QJ, QT.

    Obviousily, if you get a flop of 3 big connected cards or a big pair you will need to adjust your plan, but small pocket pairs and small connectors should be gone.
    Anyone think it might work other than me?

  • #2
    Originally posted by Big Bo
    In ANALYSIS #4 Mark stated that it was wrong to slowplay pocket kings from late position after to small bets. He suggested that it was better to re-raise for an amount that would effectively claim the pot - all in raise, etc.

    Is there no way( or wrong to try) to get more out of pocket K's? I know an Ace will flop 1 in 3 times and seriously injury your KK, but 2 in 3 times no Ace appears and KK may holds up. I hate to have as a goal the winning of a small bet (or just the blinds)with pocket KK's. I feel they are worth more.

    What would be wrong with a medium size bet designed to eliminate just drawing hands, ie, small pair, suited connectors, but have big cards continue to contribute to the pot, ie, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, KJ, KT, QJ, QT.

    Obviousily, if you get a flop of 3 big connected cards or a big pair you will need to adjust your plan, but small pocket pairs and small connectors should be gone.
    Anyone think it might work other than me?
    I don't know what analysis you are talking about as I cannot find it, so do not know the exact situation you are talking about. However, in general, the depth of money is key. Either re-raise the pot size or all-in depending mainly on stack sizes. Though opponents and psychology of the moment can alter the general play.

    When my re-raise puts me all-in, or makes it likely to get all-in on the flop if called, or puts my opponent in the situation of not being able to just call, but having to either move-in or fold preflop. Then the last thing I want my re-raise to do is to win me the pot there and then.

    There are situations where you could probably slowplay KK and just call a raise preflop. These would mainly be when you know it will be headsup, with you in position, and knowing your opponent will bet the flop, with the stacks just right where you could then move-allin without overbetting the pot too much. Prefer to do it with AA though.

    You could also just call maybe if the money was insanely deep. Deep enough where calling your re-raise would still be a small % of stack sizes. It depends how often you would re-raise with other hands.

    With regards your thoughts on re-raising a medium amount and whetehr it would work. It depends on what you mean by a medium amount in comparison to the pot, and how big stack sizes are. Or are you talking about a medium sized raise rather than re-raise? Either way, the same applies.

    Comment

    Working...
    X