AA/KK raises preflop and 88 seems unlikely since I hold one. 22 perhaps?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

BB ($20)
UTG ($53.45)
UTG+1 ($54.35)
MP1 ($32.40)
MP2 ($97.25)
MP3 ($25.95)
CO ($30.50)
Button ($6.80)
Hero ($49.50)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 8, A.
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.50, MP1 calls $0.50, 4 folds, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($2) 8, 2, K (4 players)
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks, MP1 checks.

Turn: ($2) A (4 players)
Hero bets $2, BB folds, UTG+1 folds, MP1 raises to $4, Hero raises to $13, MP1 raises to $31.9, Hero - Would have $18.90 to call, pots about $42 right now.

dont post results, even in white D:

edit out before your call of the ai rly

I wouldn't reraise to 13 there and I definitely wouldn't call the following raise. Min-reraises tend to mean strength at 50 NL and it definitely does not look like a draw. About the only hand that makes this play that you beat is A2 so try to get to showdown cheaply.

These hands are always tough for me. Min raises can be donk plays but they can also mean really strong hands that are trying to convince you to re-raise.

AA/KK/AK I think would raise preflop. A slow played set is posible but with two diamonds on the flop I think those hands would have bet the flop to protect, unless he's waiting to see a non-diamond turn to improve his odds before he puts more money in the pot.

2.2:1 to call is somewhat thin, we need about 14 or 15 outs to make the call correct on the turn if we need to improve our hand. But with two pair you may already have the best hand. I probably call and hope villain has A2/K2/82, or a wrecklessly played AQ/AJ/AT, etc, for one pair.

It's a strange line for the villain to take. He's waiting for a safe turn with a set? He minraises the turn with two pair?

I can't figure out what he has. We have a good hand. Pay it off.

I'm seeing K8, 22, or A2 here. Very rarely 88. 2 hands we beat and 2 we don't. As played calling off the turn is a no brainer IMO.

If you wanna mix things up, lead the flop occassionally. You will pick up pots quite often and find out when ur crushed.

Pokerfan - When you make calls like this, the pot odds are not based on your outs as much as they are the % of the time we're ahead. Are we ahead 1/3 of the time here? I think we absolutely are and this is an easy call.

Villain can turn over A2, K8, Ax of diamonds and we are crushing him with one card to come. This is a fairly automatic call I think and whoever suggested that you don't reraise to $13 - why not? What are you afraid of?

I am probably putting all my chips into this pot here, too. This smells like Adxd, and there are a ton of hands we beat that he could conceivably be playing this way. If he has you, oh well, on to the next hand.

Since someone chastised you for posting results earlier I'm assuming you called. What did he end up having?

I agree, this is the level I play and I think it will be 2 pair that you beat moore often than not

Playing exclusively 50 NL on Stars, I rarely see this coming from a hand that we beat. The only hand that's going to call that raise to 13.00 is a hand that beats us.

Really? So we're putting him on solely two's? That seems like a big mistake to me. I would assume at this level a lot of Axdd hands get it in here? Or other two pair hands K8, A2 etc maybe even AJ, A10 in a limped pot.

Thanks.

That's precisely why I like to post my opinions on some of these hands, so I can get a good response as to whether or not my logic (theory) is correct.

So we need to put villain on a range of hands that we are ahead of for the pot odds here, 2:1, which is 1/3rd of the time. This is where I have a hard time trying to figure out what that range needs to be. In this spot, villain has to have AA/KK/88/22/AK or a flush draw that hits on the river for us to lose (minus the A and 8 that gives us the boat). I think you are right in that we probably win here 1/3rd of the time, especially the way this hand was played by villain.

This has made me think a little deeper about the whole thing so I ran some numbers through pokerstove. To be a 2:1 dog we have to limit villain to the top 7% of hands. Is this a reasonable way to evaluate this?


Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

66,330 games 0.015 secs 4,422,000 games/sec

Board: 8d 2d Kc
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 32.304% 32.30% 00.00% 20946 1.50 { Ah8h }
Hand 1: 67.696% 67.69% 00.00% 43896 1.50 { 88+, ATs+, KTs+, AQo+ }

Thanks for the response, Acid Knight. Looking forward to further thoughts on the above if you, or anyone else, would care to help me with this.

ETA: Oops, forgot the river card for pokerstove. Adding the As would actually lower villain's range quite a bit..........

I'm not saying that, but villains tend to show down huge hands after putting in that many raises - he doesn't make that last raise with Axdd. A2 is feasible, and perhaps K8 is as well, though I don't think he puts in the last raise with either. 88 or 22 is most likely.

Just becuase you don't put in that raise with Axdd doesn't mean that the villain doesn't. What if he puts you on one pair and thinks that he can move you off of it? What if he thinks you're scared money and just won't call all-in here with 2 pair. You need to be thinking from the villain's perspective, not your own. If you don't know how the villain plays, just assign a range and play the hand accordingly. The only 2 hands that I'm really afraid of from the villain here are 88 and 22 since AA, KK and AK just seem unlikely that he wouldn't raise preflop and would play them so slowly. He could even have the same hand we do. He'd certainly play it like that, since the Hero did too.

The fact that he isn't at full buy-in and hasn't reloaded makes me less likely to believe he is thinking on multiple levels.

That doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain why you'd make that assumption?

I am not disagreeing with the points you've made before. But I tend to give someone less credit for thinking to someone that is sitting without a full buy-in. Maybe thats a naive assumption, but I would consider the villain much less likely to make a play here. A good, thinking player would prefer to sit with a full buy-in to take advantage of a weaker villain's entire stack.

Either way, like I said, I respect everything you've said and I totally understand it and I agree with most of your points (I actually place your responses in higher regard than most from previous responses you've made in other threads). Just from personal experience, and maybe it's weak of me, I don't find myself ahead often enough here.

I just thinks that it's dangerous to assume too much about someone's style of play based on their stack size unless you have something else to go with it. I mean, you could be right, but he might have just suffered a bad beat and lost half of his stack and wasn't able to reload before the next hand started. Maybe he doesn't have a lot of money on the site and is only willing to risk $50 at the table. Maybe he plays a more TAG game and bought in for the min amount. There are other options to consider but I just think that you'll get yourself into trouble by making too many assumptions based on fairly ambiguous information like that.

Fair enough.

Oh and that wasn't the basis for my argument. I was just merely using it for support after considering everything else that said villain (whom we haven't been given information on) might not be that great of a player but I might just be ignorant.

That's how I felt.

I called and it turned out the villian had 22. Reload.

I was more curious to know if this was a clear call or not. Seems like for the most part everyone feels it's an okay call.