KK vs. tilted nit
Sunday morning 1-3...8-handed...$6+3
Hero: 60ish WG...extremely card dead for the 90 minutes I've been here...VPIP <10%...$300
Villan: MAWG on my direct right...it feels like he hasn't played many more hands that I've played...he's occasionally raised, mostly limped...less than 5 hands prior, Villain was stacked by a young, Asian fish who called a large turn bet with just a gutterball...Villain's still muttering about getting stacked...$300
UTG+1 raises to $10...folded to Villain in MP who raises to $35...Hero next to act says out loud, "Let me see if I have something to play with"...and sees KsKc...Hero raises to $100...folded back to Villain who calmly says "All-in."
Choose your fighter:
"Of course you call, you have KK and he's tilted."
"Of course you fold. Titled nits don't blast-off preflop with AK/QQ when facing aggression from someone who's barely played a hand."
I think we call even if he's not tilted.
If you wanted to fold to a ship try 4betting smaller next time.
Yes of course we call. Sorry he had AA.
You have KK with 100 big blinds (and a third of that already in the middle) so it's a snap call.
I also might choose to make it $80 or $85 as the IP cold 4bettor.
Snap call no matter what.
The conclusion...
Spoiler
I'm really not surprised that everyone says this is a snap call, even though the Villain has essentially told us he has AA by his 5-bet. Of course, those with good memories will know that less than 6 mos ago I folded KK preflop (correctly), and I was excoriated for it.
Since I'm not one to labor under antediluvian prejudges, I thought for 15 seconds and folded, while saying "I had a really good hand."
"I'm sure you did."
"I'll give you a redbird if you show"
[Villain flips over AA]
"I folded Kings"
"Bullshit"
"Ask the dealer"
[Dealer pulls two kings off the muck]
Villain: "Maybe I should've called instead?"
[Dealer shows that the flop would've been AJJ...Villain sinks deeper into tilt].
The point of this thread is not to say, "Look at me, I'm so smart."
The point of this thread is to say, "Use your head rather than relying on the mistaken belief, 'I have KK. I'd rather go broke than fold'."
If there's something in the commentary/preamble on villain or table dynamic that I'm not picking up on which would skew the decision in any direction other than "lets see all 7 cards", then gg.
Would be really interested once the initial replies to the immediate question seem sufficiently run their course to hear from OP some of the why behind the post because I cant help but think i'm missing something or glossing over something here?
Lol, glad you provided some context cuz i was like "what the **** am i missing?"
Ok so im curious why the 5bet is exclusively {AA} and never {AA-QQ, AK}? or even just {AA, AK} say?
Granted, and im assuming a bit of your response, mediocre live opponents as a collective total are not the "shove with AK" types anywhere close to a frequency where they should be but I'm still not convinced with certainty of the following:
considering the math that the times we run KK into AA is insignificant in proportion to the times we have KK and villain is shoving a range that isnt just {AA} that outside VERY SPECIFIC and VERY OBVIOUS information, it is +EV to fold KK as default say.
I guess 2 part question here:
1) what is the specific thing you think makes this such an easy spot to release KK regarding details that arent just "well he 5bet and he was tight and sad too"
2) what would be the requirement needed to shift your assessment from a macro perspective towards teh hypothesis I offered above re: delta EV of KK running into AA vs KK running into {AA, xx}?
Basically i'm firmly in the: if my biggest leak is never folding KK to a shove vs the field 99% of the time, I am probably ****ing destroying that game at a clip well above everyone else
And title of "tilted nit" i guess we are supposed to assume "tilted" here just means he's gonna be a whiny baby for the next hour and a half and its more of a social problem than a strategy deficiency?
Sounds like omc on omc violence
Your 4bet sizing sucks btw
Unless my math is wrong, it looks like calling should only be a consideration if we think Villain has AA <80% of the time. In fact, if we give Villain the extremely unrealistic range of having QQ 10% of the time and AKo/AKs another 10% of the time, the numbers seem close enough to be at a point of indifference.
KK vs AA…-600 x .80 + +600 x.2 -4800 + 1200 = -3600
KK vs. QQ = +3600
KK vs. Aks/Ako = +600 x .7 + -600 x.3 = 4200 – 1800 = + 2400
-3600 x.80 = -2880
+3600 x.10 = +360
+2400 x. 10 = +2400
=-120
Folding = -100
FWIW, I'm going to need specific reads to assume that any rando is 5-betting more than 20% of the time without AA/KK.
why are you discounting the other hands in this fashion?
If they have AA, KK, QQ and AK then they have
AA 6 combos
KK 1 combo
QQ 6 combos
AK 8 combos
So they would hold QQ 6/21 or ~29% of the time
EDITED*
OOOh ok ok - i re-read your post and see what your approach was implying now - can ignore the above .
Not sure im understanding the assumptions being made at the outset of the math here.
Nobody is doubting that 5-bet range is super tight. But at 100bb KK is only a fold if you are certain range = AA. If so, fine, fold. But it's a mistake if he can possibly have QQ/AK as well.
This. But even tighter too.
In the instant case, H needs to call 200 to win a pot of 610 - rake. Right about dead on 33%. H doesn't have it if V {KK+,AKs}. Add one combo of AKo and H does.
My pool, even the nits will rip AK in for 100 bb, absent a true OMC live read. If your pool differs considerably, fold. The AKs addition kind of surprised me, no lie. Though even there, make it 32% ish with a slightly bigger 4! and it's neutral.
--- PokerStove analysis ---
board: none
distribution equity win shares tie shares
KcKs 32.235% 4110748.00 856843.00
AA,KhKd,AdKd... 67.765% 9586322.00 856843.00
computation info:
0.006 seconds
15,410,756 games
2,538,421,347 games/sec
distribution info:
KcKs = { KcKs }
AA,KhKd,AdKd,AhKh ={AcAd,AcAh,AcAs,AdAh,AdAs,AhAs,KdKh,KdAd,KhAh }
This. But even tighter too.In the instant case, H needs to call 200 to win a pot of 610 - rake. Right about dead on 33%. H doesn't have it if V {KK+,AKs}. Add one combo of AKo and H does. My pool, even the nits will rip AK in for 100 bb, absent a true OMC live read. If your pool differs considerably, fold. The AKs addition kind of surprised me, no lie. Though even there
And if we are giving villain only 1 combo of all potential AKo combos, it seems like we should be giving them all AK combos (8)
So if villain is AA, KK and AK we have 43.7% equity. Alternatively, we could swap out AK for QQ and pretend villain is a weird nit who "never shoves AK" but will GII with QQ-AA, we actually have something closer to 48% now.
As far as the main post is concerned:
If villain is tilting but tilting in a manner that is not material to the hand, i dont know exactly how to perceive that but if i take tilting at face value, I'm going to assume its not in a direction where the shove is only AA with any estimation i'm capable of offering given the information available post hoc on a forum far removed from the lived experience itself.
While i dont think the villain who only shoves AA preflop is a figment of our imagination, I dont think this hand quite elucidates the point with the elegance required that isnt relying on a results oriented perspective in other words.
Well I guess they should add that as a sticky:
“no low limit randoms ever shove AK preflop”
😃
Sunday morning.
Low stakes.
VPIP under 10.
5 bet.
Almost never going to be anything other than AA
While i dont think the villain who only shoves AA preflop is a figment of our imagination, I dont think this hand quite elucidates the point with the elegance required that isnt relying on a results oriented perspective in other words.
I'll try to get IRB approval for a randomized, double-blind study next time.
I've played low-limit all over the country in the past year, and I saw few to no randos ripping AKo 100bb deep.
I play with massive nits, and they are shoving w/ AKs and QQ, especially if they are tilted. I mean, fine, you must have been 100% sure he had AA, so don't bother asking for advice in a strat forum.
I know you don't like reading long posts, but I clearly explained in a previous post that one only needs to believe that opponent has AA >80% to make the fold.
P.S. Saying Snap call no matter what barely counts as a strat post. But you did get to read a lot of short replies, so that's good.
P.S.S. What is it about simply talking about folding KK preflop that puts so many people on tilt? You'd think I was advocating open-limping with Ax and cold calling in the SB with unsuited Broadways.
This isn't a strat post -- that's my point. I mean, everyone said call, LOL.
It is a strat post. You just can't fathom folding KK preflop.
But I do agree that everyone who has responded said to call.
Neither can anyone else who replied -- not for 100bb, especially vs a "tilted" player.
