Luton ME

[Rookie (Rodney)]

is checking behind on the river with KJ here not a pretty standard play?  There's a lot beating us at this point and I don't think I'm betting.

So my check to you on the river indicates I must have either a flush, FH or KQ/AK?

Just because there is alot beating us doesn't mean I have to have it. Look at betting patterns, HOW can my check mean that I have one of the above hands? My limp preflop surely discards AK, this means that KQ is surely the only hand I check on the river here that is winning vs you? And even then I prolly raise pre, no?

[mondatoo]

It is much more likely from his check on the river that rookie would have a worse k and has slowed down and that rookie is the one thinking there's not much he can beat so pp should be erring more towards rookie having a worse king than that he's now decided to check a monster after betting 2 streets ?

[celtic]

what do u rooks if this hand really played out this way?

[mondatoo]

what do u rooks if this hand really played out this way?

He said snap call, sigh do keep up

[Claw75]

is checking behind on the river with KJ here not a pretty standard play?  There's a lot beating us at this point and I don't think I'm betting.

So my check to you on the river indicates I must have either a flush, FH or KQ/AK?

Just because there is alot beating us doesn't mean I have to have it. Look at betting patterns, HOW can my check mean that I have one of the above hands? My limp preflop surely discards AK, this means that KQ is surely the only hand I check on the river here that is winning vs you? And even then I prolly raise pre, no?

I think your plan to check raise with your hand is good.  If I was in PP's seat however I'd be considering whether you'd decided to just check call with KQ, KJ, KT, Kx or a small flush given that he's come along with you all the way.  That said, the play being analysed here is way beyond my capability level, and I'd probably check behind just because I tend to be cautious (maybe too much so) in that kind of position.  

[Rookie (Rodney)]

what do u rooks if this hand really played out this way?

Yeah probs snap.

is checking behind on the river with KJ here not a pretty standard play?  There's a lot beating us at this point and I don't think I'm betting.

So my check to you on the river indicates I must have either a flush, FH or KQ/AK?

Just because there is alot beating us doesn't mean I have to have it. Look at betting patterns, HOW can my check mean that I have one of the above hands? My limp preflop surely discards AK, this means that KQ is surely the only hand I check on the river here that is winning vs you? And even then I prolly raise pre, no?

I think your plan to check raise with your hand is good.  If I was in PP's seat however I'd be considering whether you'd decided to just check call with KQ, KJ, KT, Kx or a small flush given that he's come along with you all the way.  That said, the play being analysed here is way beyond my capability level, and I'd probably check behind just because I tend to be cautious (maybe too much so) in that kind of position.  

I certainly wouldn't, and I hope most players wouldn't want to check a flush when they bet their draw two streets. What is the point in that if you can't value bet it?

[action man]

parker is weak/tight "checks behind when his hand is clearly good" it wasnt in this case but it clearly was. check only good vs someone capable of a float imo

we know with parker that he has trips minimum here so surely a large value bet here is the best.

[NoflopsHomer]

I think vs PP, if you fire two streets and small CR river he'll most likely not pay you off (what can you actually have at that point?). So better to vb bigger on the end like Wick says imo. Vs theoretical shove over CR, it probably is a fold vs Paul, people like Jim Reid, Jeff B, deffo snap. Against these two, I like the river check/raise a lot more precisely for this reason, with PP I think he is far more likely to fold when behind and when he jams, far more likely to be ahead of you than these two when they do the same.

[david3103]

I think vs PP, if you fire two streets and small CR river he'll most likely not pay you off (what can you actually have at that point?). So better to vb bigger on the end like Wick says imo. Vs theoretical shove over CR, it probably is a fold vs Paul, people like Jim Reid, Jeff B, deffo snap. Against these two, I like the river check/raise a lot more precisely for this reason, with PP I think he is far more likely to fold when behind and when he jams, far more likely to be ahead of you than these two when they do the same.

This element of the original post puzzled me.
Paul Parker was identified as being a solid player and for someone of that level to shove when he has so much fold equity would suggest he has the nuts.

But then I'm barely plankton in considering plays at this level.

[Dry em]

I would fold to the hypothetical shove from Paul - doesn't have less than K8 almost 100% of the time

Prefer going for pot sized value on the river as I would be even less convinced that Paul would call a check raise as I would be of him betting his own hand for value, given the flush got there. There's only really 2 likely hands that you could call a bet from him with that he beats (K9, K10 and these would be v marginal calls) and given his conservative (and thinking) style, a check behind wouldn't surprise me.

[AlexMartin]

i deffo wouldnt fold the river if action went as stated. 66 and 88 make up too much of his 4b value shove range, add some combinatronics by holding a king and its a ridiculous fold imo. As played, i think pp is prolly too passive to make a river CR optimal rooks, v aggy opponent its deffo best line.

[MANTIS01]

OK. Rooky's first question is would you fold to a river jam? And I've read a number of opinions that say prob yes. What? WHAT? I don't get it at all. How on earth can you justify deciding to play a really speculative hand like K-4 in the first place if you muck it on a K-K-4 board.
I would only ever fold this hand if I made a pact with myself to insert two 25 chips into my anus every time I looked down to see  in the future. I don't like the limp with the hand myself, but now you're involved that's it you can't fold. Reasons given for folding include the oppo's range so early in a big event. I don't care whether my oppo was the whole FT Team, with or without Clonie, and we're playing the first hand at the World Series ME FT after a 16 year break, I'm still hiring the trapeze act from Circus Circus to fling me into the middle clutching my chips. He can very probably have 8-8 or 6-6 here.

Moving on to the second question about the river check. I think it's horrible Rooky. I haven't dismissed your logic but I just don't think it makes sense for this particular situation. Although I don't agree with the K-4 fold I can see the thinking of people. It's early and people want to settle in etc...so they get kinda cautious when heat comes. Folding the 3rd nuts kinda cautious. So why would your oppo bet here in such cautious times and risk inviting this nuts-folding heat upon himself? I would say your oppo thinks you either have a King or a flush the way the hand has been played. Does he think you fold either to 1 bet? If he does bet, and that's a big IF, he will insta-muck every single hand you beat when you raise. So you win just a little bit more. He will obv call with the two hands that crush you and on those occasions you lose your whole stack. So why check? You either lose your stack or win a little, and if he checks behind you lose value and give the table free info at showdown. I would just bet and throw him the opportunity to do loads of funky things. Your ability to actually win more chips is much greater if you bet and you still lose the same if you're beat.

[AlexMartin]

OK. Rooky's first question is would you fold to a river jam? And I've read a number of opinions that say prob yes. What? WHAT? I don't get it at all. How on earth can you justify deciding to play a really speculative hand like K-4 in the first place if you muck it on a K-K-4 board.
I would only ever fold this hand if I made a pact with myself to insert two 25 chips into my anus every time I looked down to see  in the future. I don't like the limp with the hand myself, but now you're involved that's it you can't fold. Reasons given for folding include the oppo's range so early in a big event. I don't care whether my oppo was the whole FT Team, with or without Clonie, and we're playing the first hand at the World Series ME FT after a 16 year break, I'm still hiring the trapeze act from Circus Circus to fling me into the middle clutching my chips. He can very probably have 8-8 or 6-6 here.

Moving on to the second question about the river check. I think it's horrible Rooky. I haven't dismissed your logic but I just don't think it makes sense for this particular situation. Although I don't agree with the K-4 fold I can see the thinking of people. It's early and people want to settle in etc...so they get kinda cautious when heat comes. Folding the 3rd nuts kinda cautious. So why would your oppo bet here in such cautious times and risk inviting this nuts-folding heat upon himself? I would say your oppo thinks you either have a King or a flush the way the hand has been played. Does he think you fold either to 1 bet? If he does bet, and that's a big IF, he will insta-muck every single hand you beat when you raise. So you win just a little bit more. He will obv call with the two hands that crush you and on those occasions you lose your whole stack. So why check? You either lose your stack or win a little, and if he checks behind you lose value and give the table free info at showdown. I would just bet and throw him the opportunity to do loads of funky things. Your ability to actually win more chips is much greater if you bet and you still lose the same if you're beat.

wow tldr

[MANTIS01]

wow tldr

lol. I remember when I was 18 there were a few guys at school saying that about Hamlet just before we went into our English A-level. I think they failed in the end.

[AndrewT]

wow tldr

lol. I remember when I was 18 there were a few guys at school saying that about Hamlet just before we went into our English A-level. I think they failed in the end.

Were they the boys from class 2B? Or were they from another class?