How do people on here reccommend playing KK?

I was playing .10/.25 NL at Party Poker.

Dealt KK on BB, a couple of calls and SB raised to $1.50.
I reraised to $5.
Everyone else folded.
He went all in over the top to about $20.

If I had a read on him it was definitely tight. I folded.


Did I play correctly?

Originally Posted by WotaWaster

How do people on here reccommend playing KK?

I was playing .10/.25 NL at Party Poker.

Dealt KK on BB, a couple of calls and SB raised to $1.50.
I reraised to $5.
Everyone else folded.
He went all in over the top to about $20.

If I had a read on him it was definitely tight. I folded.


Did I play correctly?

Sorry. You didn't play that very well. Even if he had AA, that is like only 5% better off than your KK. But that is irrelevant at this point. Let's look at the betting.

Original bet of 6xBB. Why? With AA you never want to drive people out of the hand which is what a 6xBB tells everyone you're trying to do. It also tells people that you're happy to buy the blinds plus calls.

Second bet of $20. Why? Here he is having already put $1.50 into the pot only to be re-raised to $5. What is this guy thinking at this point? Panic seems more like it, so the guy doesn't just re-raise, which requires calculation and effort, instead he actually takes the easier option of pushing all-in to get it over with.

Unfortunately, you take this panicky play to signify strength and fold. The big bettor probably wipes their brow and lights a cigarette in relief.

You had the second best starting hand. Don't be scared to play your KK against Aces in No-Limit games.

A good alternate play you could have done here was to call the $1.50. Because that would almost certainly see you go heads up against this guy. Plus save you $3.50 if the flop seemed to help the other player more than you.

Originally Posted by Tristan

Sorry. You didn't play that very well. Even if he had AA, that is like only 5% better off than your KK. But that is irrelevant at this point

Go on, explain how AA is only 5% better off than KK.

I think you may be slightly confused.

Originally Posted by Irexes

Go on, explain how AA is only 5% better off than KK.

I think you may be slightly confused.

Both are the top pairs, yes?! And KK can hit a straight both up and down.

It is only after the flop that AA comes to be about 20% better than KK if neither hand has improved. And then after the river AA becomes about 90% better than KK if neither hand is improved.

I won't even begin to go into what other players will most likely have. Especially with online poker. Online, I will always play KK strong, no matter how many callers. But AA is sometimes worth limping in online games, depending on number of players and callers etc.

Stuff it. I will delve a little into what others may be holding.

Statistically, more players in low stakes games will call with Ace-Rag while King-Rag will be folded. So now the advantage of AA over KK drops a little because there is a better chance that the helpful King may yet drop, while the helpful Ace may have been folded.

Originally Posted by Tristan

Both are the top pairs, yes?! And KK can hit a straight both up and down.

It is only after the flop that AA comes to be about 20% better than KK if neither hand has improved. And then after the river AA becomes about 90% better than KK if neither hand is improved.

Ok. You are so completely wrong here that I doubt it's worth trying to explain to you why. Read a book.

To the original guy, for every AA you run into (at worse than 4 to 1) there are going to be a bunch of QQ, KK AK and JJs as well as the odd maniacal reraise. Credit to you for being the kind of person with the discpline to fold when you think you've run in to AA but I don't think it's the right move in the long run.

Yeah KK is 3:1 Underdog to AA.

I think I would raise to $1.50 with AA and a few previous callers, you would expect 1 player to call. The way these tables play I would expect that raise to get called by all sorts of hands like JJ, QQ, AK, AQ, maybe even hands like Axs or J10s.

To be fair I think he could have made that aise with any of the above hands. However to me my raise is saying I have KK or AA. He then shouldn't go all in on less than AA.

I also think he expected I would call. At this level not many players would throw a hand away in that sitution. I have been the all in bettor before and called by JJ, QQ and AK so I disagree with that to some extent.

Originally Posted by Irexes

Ok. You are so completely wrong here that I doubt it's worth trying to explain to you why. Read a book.

Don't discount something because you don't understand it. Plus I'm basically saying what players like Brunson and Chan etc have said. I'm also a moderately successful player, though very far from being more than someone who plays for a little extra pocket money.

AA also wins a mere 80% of the time when the bets are all-in pre-flop. And that isn't always against KK. It also takes into account the problem of other hands not getting help on the flop.

Why don't you read a book or two, because I've read several as well as a variety of online material.

Thanks Irexes that is what I'm looking for. If I could say there is for example:

30% AA, 30% KK, 30% QQ and 10% other crap, then long term it is correct to call.

If I put him on 50% AA and 50% KK then I shouldn't call.

I really felt it was Aces though, I don't recall the guy playing more than 1 or 2 hands out of the 30 I played.