Well played or not so well played? K9o on the button.

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, 1.2 Tournament, 40/80 Blinds (7 handed)

I have a pretty decent stack here on the button with Ks9h and limp after the very tight aggressive player UTG. The player UTG is very tight, he has shown down only premium hands and my thoughts are that he is probably holding a small pp or something like TT and is set mining. So, basically what I would like to know is, did I play this optimally? My aim as soon as I hit my King high straight was to get all of my chips in the pot as I assumed that if he had anything he had hit a set of tens on the turn so I was betting very aggressively. I think I played this correctly and was pretty pleased (although somewhat surprised) when he turned over a pair of aces before the river as I had about a 94% chance of an almost double up but I would like to hear some other opinions. Would I have been better just calling his re-raise on the turn (this would have given me the chance to have a re-think when the King hit on the river and possibly make a wise lay down to any action)?

MP1 (t2670)
MP2 (t910)
CO (t195)
Hero (Button) (t2460)
SB (t3635)
BB (t1675)
UTG (t1955)

Hero's M: 20.50

Preflop: Hero is Button with Ks, 9h
UTG calls t80, 3 folds, Hero calls t80, 1 fold, BB checks

Flop: (t280) Jc, Qd, 2h (3 players)
BB checks, UTG checks, Hero checks

Turn: (t280) 10c (3 players)
BB checks, UTG bets t80, Hero raises to t240, 1 fold, UTG raises to t400, Hero raises to t2380 (All-In), UTG calls t1475 (All-In)

River: (t4030) Kd (2 players, 2 all-in)

Total pot: t4030

Firstly, I would fold K9o preflop rather than calling. Many players will limp hands like KT/KJ/KQ and A9 in UTG's spot which means that if you hit a K or 9 high flop, you can lose a lot of chips finding out that you have the second best hand. This is particularly the case if UTG is a tight aggressive player as per your read.

However, post-flop I think you played it fine. Once you hit your straight, I am happy to get all my chips in the pot - I definitely would not flat call the re-raise on the turn. The only hand that beats you is AK, and since your read is that opp is tight/aggressive I would not expect such a player to limp AK from UTG.

Thanks for the input.

I am trying to loosen up my game in order to steal more pots and accumulate chips before the bubble so I think that is the reason for the experimentation with K9o in this situation. The idea I had was that I could make a straight or a set or just take the pot if the other players were showing weakness but maybe I just have to accept that this kind of play will only lose me chips in the long run.

I have been finding that playing only premium hands means that I get run over easily and often end up on the bubble as a short stack so I do think that loosening up is a good idea (although this depends on the table) but maybe this is just too loose.

Originally Posted by frjd2

Maybe I have been watching too much poker after dark and I need someone to give me a reality check...

No more watching Patrik Antonius ! Limping K9 is too passive (we don't have intiative) and raising isn't a good option. We have to fold to any aggression post-flop unless we spike 2 pair or a good draw. Give it up pre flop IMO

Originally Posted by frjd2

I have been trying to loosen up a bit and play more aggressively in order to accumulate chips which is maybe why I decided to limp K9o on the button.

Do you see the contradiction here? You want to play more aggressively but you limped the hand. Not that I'm recommending it but if UTG was a weak/tight player you could RAISE this hand to win the pot uncontested.

Originally Posted by frjd2

I think that if there was any aggression on the flop then I would have dropped the hand with anything less than two pair.

The chance of hitting two pair or better on the flop is about 3-4% so you need to win 25-30 times the amount you need to call to make this a good play assuming that UTG stacks off every time you hit a monster hand on the flop. You're paying 80 chips to potentially win about 2000 so considering that UTG definitely doesn't stack off every time you hit, you're not getting the right price.

Originally Posted by frjd2

Is this a terrible play or just a mildly bad one?

It's a -EV play, OK maybe it's not the worst possible play I can think of, but I still wouldn't do it.

Originally Posted by frjd2

My game is generally pretty tight but I do feel that in tables full of TAG players it is acceptable to loosen things up with some caution and I am finding myself getting to the bubble with a decent stack now rather than getting there after playing 2 or 3 hands and having 900 chips left.

If you are loosening up against tight players, like I said above you want to be RAISING more preflop rather than just flat calling.

You'd be surprised how tight you have to play in SNGs due to shallow stacks and the payout structure. Very different to big MTTs or cash games which have much deeper stacks.

sorry, I edited my post as I thought no-one had read it and I decided it was not very concise and now I see two new posts....

thanks for the advice though

Thanks again. You have been very helpful.

I have been thinking about these things and maybe coming to the wrong conclusions and I do see the contradiction in what I was saying which is helpful.

Would it be a good idea to limp an sc or pp here? Are there any good hands to limp in this spot?

Try and move away from limping too much in games, it's just not very profitable in shallow stacked SNGs. You could limp PPs here, which wouldn't be terrible. SCs tend to play better in multi-way pots, so I would tend to fold in this spot with only one limper.

Edited, actually I noticed UTG is pretty low with regards to stack size. If we limp we can't call a reraise and still have odds to set-mine. That said the blinds will rarely squeeze, so might still be ok. I lean towards folding PPs and SCs in this spot with the effective stacks in play.

Hmmmm, again, I understand this (I think )and it is very helpful.

So in general limping is only a good idea with SCs or PPs when in late position and when there is a family pot brewing due to the implied odds and the big pay off if a you flop a set. Otherwise a raise or a fold are better options.

I am still not entirely clear on what the squeeze play is designed to do and I certainly have never consciously tried to squeeze so I would be grateful if you could enlighten me on that particular topic.

How would you play a hand such as KQ suited in this position? I assume a raise would be the correct play even though this hand is not a premium one.

Regarding SCs and small-medium PPs, the time to limp along is when you can see a flop for cheap but potentially win a huge multiple of the cost of limping if you hit a monster hand on the flop. This is generally when blinds are small (ie. levels 1 and 2), you are in position (so the chance of somebody raising in front is lower) and there are multiple players already in the pot (which increases the chance that somebody loses their stack if you hit).

There's a good post in the SNG Tactics Digest by TLR on this point - http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...-a-139040.html

Regarding KQs in this position, honestly against a tight player limping from UTG I would fold it. If it was folded around to me I would raise to 200 and take it from there, however.

I'd add a few more things.

The players on 'Poker After Dark' are playing at least 200 big blinds deep. Often much more. In this hand, however, the effective stack is barely 25 big blinds. This makes for a completely different game. Shallow stack (compared to TV-poker) and tight opponent means you don't have the implied odds to play it. (I personally would still limp with PP's here, though.)

Calling pre with the intention to steal the pot often on later streets is a viable play against some opponents and it can still be considered a form of aggression. That's the main reason why the limp in this particular hand is not terrible. (Playing it just for the implied odds for when you hit a good hand, would be terrible. If you're going to play K9o here to hit 2-pair or better, then why not play 62o here?) What I don't understand, however, is that if you're calling to steal the pot on flop if your opponents show weakness, then why didn't you bet flop after you flopped an ISD and your opponents showed weakness?

Squeezing is 3-betting after a raise and one or more calls. (Sometimes raising after two or more limpers, like it would be in this hand, is also referred to as a squeeze.) It is sometimes done with relatively weak hands. The idea is that the original raiser won't often call because he won't know what the callers behind him will do (he is therefore 'squeezed' between the squeezer and the callers) and the callers won't often call because they don't have a strong hand because they just called. The amount of pseudo-dead money (the money put into the pot by players who are likely to fold) is an added benefit.

I found myself doing the same as frjd2, loosening up some trying to accumulate more chips prior to the bubble due to always being short at the bubble. I think the big question to those that know what they are doing and are beating this game is: Is it typical for you to be shorty on or near the bubble? If so, does it then become controlled, but almost recklace aggression to get past the bubble? Could you give us a idea of what a typical game looks like for you?