Nasty River Spot: AK good vs Tight Player? (2 Viewers)

[Senzrock]

doesn’t seem like he put much thought into it

This. A good reminder that *so many* of our opponents are really not doing any hand reading. Especially if people are drinking/having a good time. I think we often assume that everyone is analyzing hands the way we might be. I once heard a podcast about this subject actually - our internal monologue assumes that the things we think are obvious about a specific spot or hand are also obvious to villain. In fact, villains are often thinking very differently - or sometimes not at all, about the spot we are trying to dissect. I found this to be really useful insight over the years.

I don't think he thinks he was bluffing with the river raise.

Definitely not lol - he thought he had the best hand here 100%.

What's a range?

Basically. In fact, if you ask every person in your home game to break down what they think "someones range" actually means - trust me, you will get some funny answers.

 

[davislane]

seems like you got out played.... if im floating that flop and dinging one of my outs they get all the monies if they have the better hand.

 

[Senzrock]

seems like you got out played

Thanks for joining!

 

[davislane]

Thanks for joining!

let me be clear. you werent outplayed on purpose. more of a case that you leveled yourself into folding aasuming you were playing yourself. you were thinking levels way above that of your opponents. once you have progressed your understanding of the game its hard to play with your "mates" for fun anymore.

when i play with friends these days i just default to donk/maniac/calling station mode and keep it simple.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Your friend is lying to you.

Or he's not nearly as tight as @Senzrock thinks he is. That river raise with KQ just seems so freaking awful. If he's telling the truth, Villain got lucky; he was bluffing and didn't realize it.

Also for the record, I don't like the lead out on the river either. I'm check-calling and giving villain a chance to bluff or value-own himself, and also protecting myself from having to fold when I bet and he raises.

I'm more likely to bet-fold here in a cash game than a tourney. In cash I want to go for the thin value more often, but in a tourney I don't mind losing it in exchange for protecting my stack. This may vary depending on how deep I am and how much I can rebuy or add-on at the time.

 

[grebe]

My thought as well. You're both lying to each other lol

He said "I don't bluff" in a thread he bluffed twice... If he had KQ. I definitely would remove the "tight"player moniker from him, lol!

 

[warma]

how did the tournament end up for you and V?

 

[Senzrock]

how did the tournament end up for you and V?

I busted just shy of the money, he came in 3rd/15 for the $205 cash.

 

[Stufflymcstuff]

It’s interesting how both of your reads on each other seemed to change throughout the hand.

He seemed to think you would play really tight on the flop against a raise, checked back turn because he was worried he couldn’t get paid off? but then on the river his read transformed into thinking you’re a calling station.

You read him to be a bluff happy do-do head who also could be raising bluff catchers on the flop, but then on the river your read changed to him playing solid and not having many bluffs.

And every single read was proven wrong on both sides.

 

[Zr1]

Tournament poker is stack preservation. This hand was played the exact opposite of how it should be played

 

[JMC9389]

Tournament poker is stack preservation. This hand was played the exact opposite of how it should be played

I mean, the line from villain makes zero sense. He's raising on a dry flop with king high?

 

[RainmanTrail]

I think it's kinda funny that you believe your friend. @kmccormick100 lies to me about what he had every single time we discuss hands. Your buddy knew you had AK. It was practically face up the way you played the hand. He's fucking with you, 100%. There's no way he had KQ in this hand. Even if your read on what type of a player he is is wrong, he still didn't have KQ. It would mean that he played every single street like an idiot. You made the right fold. AK was no good.

 

[Mandos]

You mean his river raise was a mistake? Definitely agreed. He should just be calling my river bet there. Very unnecessary bluff in a spot where he doesn't need to (although it worked out great for him in this specific case).

No i meant that he bluffed you on accident on the river, but I think your initial river raise was a mistake. Without that you can probably check-call depending on sizing.
Seems like the crypto gambling is rubbing off on villain's poker and he doesn't even know it - either he's lying about his hand or he's not tight anymore, at least on occasion.

 

[Zr1]

We dont know what he really had nor does it really matter. Bet sizing is out of whack. Flop is a fold. I think we are behind here most of the time with a tight villian. We have some showdown value but by betting when probably behind we spew and allow this kind of thing to happen. We check he bets if we want to bluff catch we call but atleast we get to showdown. Bloating pot is not a great thing in tournament poker. U artificially price your self in to bad calls

 

[RainmanTrail]

I mean, the line from villain makes zero sense. He's raising on a dry flop with king high?

It makes perfect sense when you realize the villain is lying about what he had though. Tight players don't raise KQ from early position pre flop. They also don't raise it on that flop. And nobody who does either of these two things checks it back on the turn in position and then smashes the river when a scare card drops in. Homeboy did not have KQ. He had JJ or maaaaybe T9s.

 

[JMC9389]

It makes perfect sense when you realize the villain is lying about what he had though. Tight players don't raise KQ from early position pre flop. They also don't raise it on that flop. And nobody who does either of these two things checks it back on the turn in position and then smashes the river when a scare card drops in. Homeboy did not have KQ. He had JJ or maaaaybe T9s.

Of course it does. We're agreeing here and saying the same thing but in a different way. The line makes zero sense for KQ. Villain is full of it.

I don't buy 9/10 here either though. OMC level tight players aren't raising that in early or middle position. 7's, 8's, Jacks, and even Queens, Kings, and Aces make the most sense here.

 

[RainmanTrail]

Also worth noting is that the "I had KQ" line is the classic line that everyone says when they know you had AK and want you to think they outplayed you.

 

[Mandos]

Or are we making a mistake in assuming that villain's play must make sense? I've lost more than I care to admit attempting to find order in what was actually chaos.

 

[Senzrock]

Or he's not nearly as tight as @Senzrock thinks he is. That river raise with KQ just seems so freaking awful. If he's telling the truth, Villain got lucky; he was bluffing and didn't realize it.

Also for the record, I don't like the lead out on the river either. I'm check-calling and giving villain a chance to bluff or value-own himself, and also protecting myself from having to fold when I bet and he raises.

I'm more likely to bet-fold here in a cash game than a tourney. In cash I want to go for the thin value more often, but in a tourney I don't mind losing it in exchange for protecting my stack. This may vary depending on how deep I am and how much I can rebuy or add-on at the time.

I I mean, the line from villain makes zero sense. He's raising on a dry flop with king high?
You would be surprised how often players do this.

 

[Senzrock]

I mean, the line from villain makes zero sense. He's raising on a dry flop with king high?

You would be surprised how often players do this.

 

[Senzrock]

Tournament poker is stack preservation. This hand was played the exact opposite of how it should be played

lol ok

 

[Senzrock]

I think it's kinda funny that you believe your friend. @kmccormick100 lies to me about what he had every single time we discuss hands. Your buddy knew you had AK. It was practically face up the way you played the hand. He's fucking with you, 100%. There's no way he had KQ in this hand. Even if your read on what type of a player he is is wrong, he still didn't have KQ. It would mean that he played every single street like an idiot. You made the right fold. AK was no good.

I honestly think he was telling me the truth. He had nothing to gain by lying, he’s not that serious of a player. He blamed it later on weed gummies lol

 

[Senzrock]

No i meant that he bluffed you on accident on the river, but I think your initial river raise was a mistake. Without that you can probably check-call depending on sizing.
Seems like the crypto gambling is rubbing off on villain's poker and he doesn't even know it - either he's lying about his hand or he's not tight anymore, at least on occasion.

I bet not raised the river but yeah I hear you. He’s definitely shown spots (clearly like this) where he can totally get out of line. And really that’s my larger point with this hand. When something doesn’t make sense - don’t be afraid to call down and make confusing villain show you the nuts (hard to do in NLHE). People make moves all the time, even players we have tagged as “tight” or “nits”.

 

[Senzrock]

Or are we making a mistake in assuming that villain's play must make sense? I've lost more than I care to admit attempting to find order in what was actually chaos.

Exactly my point. His play(s) here don’t make any sense - and these are often the types of players we are up against. I’ve lost more money than I care to remember folding really good hands to players who were just messing around without a clue. From the comments on here it sounds like many of you have too, whether you realize it or not

 

[Senzrock]

Also worth noting is that the "I had KQ" line is the classic line that everyone says when they know you had AK and want you to think they outplayed you.

You can stick to your story and I will stick to mine lol. I’m curious why you find it so important to *insist* you just know that this player is lying to me. But to each their own!

 

[RainmanTrail]

I honestly think he was telling me the truth. He had nothing to gain by lying...

And yet in your very next breath, you highlight precisely what he gains by lying... (for you to pay him off next time)

... And really that’s my larger point with this hand. When something doesn’t make sense - don’t be afraid to call down and make confusing villain show you the nuts...

You can stick to your story and I will stick to mine lol. I’m curious why you find it so important to *insist* you just know that this player is lying to me. But to each their own!

I don't care if you believe me or not. I'm just having fun ribbing you. But I do believe your friend is lying to you. I'd wager good money on it.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

weed gummies lol

I'm on board the "villain was full of it, he had JJ" train, but I guess this could be a plausible excuse for playing KQ as badly as he did.

But even so it still smells like JJ.

 

[Senzrock]

I understand the skepticism, but I find it interesting that no one will take my read on the situation given that I know this player and pressed him on it myself. To me, it seems like folks are uncomfortable having their own (poker) beliefs challenged (which this hand certainly does).

One of my points is that we are so quick to put villains on sets in these spots, it's just a gut response almost. It allows us to "fold and move on" instead of actually digging into some hand reading and figuring out the logic on each street.

Anyway, appreciate folks following along, even if you don't believe the ending lol.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I understand the skepticism, but I find it interesting that no one will take my read on the situation given that I know this player and pressed him on it myself. To me, it seems like folks are uncomfortable having their own (poker) beliefs challenged (which this hand certainly does).

One of my points is that we are so quick to put villains on sets in these spots, it's just a gut response almost. It allows us to "fold and move on" instead of actually digging into some hand reading and figuring out the logic on each street.

Anyway, appreciate folks following along, even if you don't believe the ending lol.

I absolutely don't mean to discount your read at all. You know the guy, so your opinion is infinitely better than any guesses I could make based on a few posts of second-hand information.

I'm only saying that every action Villain took in this hand is repping JJ (or less likely, T9s). I'm just trying to make the point that we should consider that he was stronger than KQ. If your gut and your knowledge of the guy tells you that he's being truthful, I believe you.

Also, please invite me to your next game. He played nearly every street horribly.

 

[Legend5555]

One of my points is that we are so quick to put villains on sets in these spots, it's just a gut response almost. It allows us to "fold and move on" instead of actually digging into some hand reading and figuring out the logic on each street.

Let's say the villain raises the flop with 1 combo each of 77 and 88, the 2 combos of 78s, half the combos of 99, all combos of TT-QQ, all combos of T9s, and half all combos of 56s (we assume he sometimes folds or doesn't even open 56s).

You have just barely the right equity to call. But that's assuming you get to see the whole runout. Often times you are just going to check/fold when you miss the turn. And when they do bet again, you are up against almost the same range and now only have 1 card to go. Couple that with the fact that when you hit it's hard to get paid because you are OOP, and that a decent amount of the time you hit you will get value owned. That all adds up to a spot that I'm just not sure this is worth the complexity.