I was kibitizing Jimmie23 (a.k.a AlusivPnkBny) playing 25/50 CAP (1500) on Full Tilt and observed this hand:

Effective Stack: $1500

Jimmie23: SB w/ K9o

Jimmie23 open raises (3x) and the BB flats.

Flop: K83 w/ 2 clubs

SB checks, Jimmie23 bets the pot, BB shoves and Jimmie23 calls.

BB shows: K8o (for Kings up)

Luckily for Jimmie23 the river brings a 9 and he takes it down.


Discussing the hand with Jimmie23, we both agreed it is not a very interesting hand. The pot size bet reeks of a draw which induces a shove from the BB. But what struck me is that if BB has Kx Jimmie23 is hardly a favorite to win IMO because my feeling is that the worse Kx that BB is likely to flat is K8s. I think it is quite likely that BB could flat with K9o+ but K8o seems somewhat speculative (at best.) Of course this IS a battle-of-the-blinds so anything is possible.

Jimmie23 immediately challenged with: Do you really think people view K7s differently than K8s?

I do, because with an 8 you are beating 50% of other possible kickers. But the real question here is what does everyone else think? If a majority of players view K7s as just as playable as K8s, that means that K8s is imminently more playable than K7s. If a majority of players think K8s is far superior to K7s then K8s is imminently more playable than K7s (are you getting this?) but the downside is that if a majority of players think that K8s is more playable than K7s then the value of K8s is greatly diminished because you are likely to be up against a better King.

While many people may not see any signficant difference between K8s and K7s, it would be hard to argue that K8s is essentially equivalent to K9s.

So the real question is if you are in Jimmie23's shoes on this hand AND you know your opponent has Kx, do you call?

m0ckSt4r