This situation fortunately hasn't happened to me yet, but it's really my deep-stack nightmare, so I thought I'd post it before it happens.

2/5 NL. You have $1,500 in front of you, as does your opponent. The basic question is how far you want to go with KK in this kind of situation.

Ok, let's take as first case a situation where you raise to, say, $20, and get re-raised to $60 with those stacks. If it's a tight player, I don't have a problem re-raising now to somewhere in the $180-$200 range and laying down if I get yet another raise (?). And, against a tight opponent, I suppose the same thing is reasonable with reverse positions.

But how about against a loose opponent?

Here's what I see a lot: I've had people calling re-raises as big as $100 with hands like AQ (in the one I'm thinking about, I may even have been up against AJ--he didn't end up showing but did have an A; I just hit my set on the turn). So, the A really is a scare card (as are Q and J to some extent).

So, let's go back to the out-of-position case: You raise to $20 and get re-raised to $80 or so. A loose player will often do this on QQ (less so on AK, although imo the AK re-raise is actually a better move). Intuitively, I'd say that the best move is just to pop it back to around $300. You may still get a call from QQ--but you may also get a call from AA. Surely AK or any weaker ace is gone at this point (??).

Well, if that's the case, are you really getting the information you need here? The alternative would be a flat call of the re-raise, then bet out the flop if no ace appears--and with some awareness of JJ and QQ sets. Maybe the flat call is actually better.

I guess the real bottom line here is that I only feel secure playing for that kind of stack if I hit a set AND there's no A on the board.

If you pop it with yet another re-raise, any flop bet is indeed going to mean playing for full stack of $1,500 here, and I just don't quite see that.

What do others think of putting a cap of somewhere around $500 on the possible loss from unimproved KK that looks like it's holding up?

Just as an example: You raise to $20, get a re-raise to $80 and flat call. Flop is raggedy. You bet out $160 and get a call. I think I'd be inclined to just check to the river at that point unless I improve--calling maybe a $200 turn or river bet, but not going much further than that.

Similarly, with position: You re-raise to $100 (I like re-raising harder against a loose opponent simply to hedge my bets a little against strange plays) and get a flat call. I think this already is a decent although unreliable indication that we don't have AA here. And even against a loose deep-stack, I just don't see coming over the top of a $300 re-raise with KK when $1,500 is at stake.

Anyhow, as to the flop, if it's raggedy, I think I'd go ahead and bet pot (letting go to an A) to a check, but probably just flat call a bet (??).

Does the $500-$600 range sound about right for the cap of what you're willing to lose against a loose player with unimproved KK against possible AA? The main idea on these betting sequences is just keeping the pot under control with a stack that deep.

Would anyone actually want to play KK for $1,500 in a situation like that?

If the amount of money on the table has started to effect the way you think of your hand it is probably time to just pack it in. It sounds like you are playing a tougher live game than I've ever sat, but it is still KK. It bites to lose a bunch of money with cowboys, but they are good very often, and you should play them preflop and postflop as your opponents tendencies dictate for whatever their value is at given moment. Setting a stop loss on them only going to burn you long term. However, if I was going to set one it would be the profit in my stack vs. my buy in and reloading, I don't mind taking a lump at the opportunity to make a really big score.

I think this is an area where you can ideally run many plays, preflop and post-flop, and what would decide if it is the correct one is your current opponent and position. I can feasible see check-raising a ragged flop against a looser opponent that had re-raised preflop, making a continuation bet after a smooth call for 1/2 2/3 pot at a tighter player who reraised preflop, or a smooth call with position against either of them with the intention of hammering the turn or trying to get to showdown cheap. I try not to worry too much about AA or sets, unless I have good reason to know that I need to show them a set myself to win.

If that stacks are that deep, Im going to play defensively once I get reraised.

Alot depends on the opponent of course. If its a rock who Ive never seen reraise anyone and he reraises me to $100, I might just fold it right there.

It also depends on how much money everyone else has. If we are the only 2 $1500 stacks and everyone one else has $500 or less, Im not playing for my stack against this guy with KK. I'll wait for a set, str8 or flush to play for my stack against him.

I think there are way too many variables involved to easily answer the question.

Yes, I really agree with you, ice. Actually, the deep stacks do, I think, make calling a $100 re-raise even from a deep-stacked rock more profitable, because of the implied odds here on hitting the set.

Otherwise I agree with you fully. We had a pretty deep-stacked table tonight with a mix of horrible, decent, and one very good player (hopefully I can also include myself in that category as well--but excluding me).

rdale, I really disagree with you on this one. I mean, I won't say I have to have the stone cold nuts to play for $1,500 at a 2/5 table, but I just don't think KK is normally enough to just automatically move in that many chips.

I actually also discussed this with the good player at the table tonight. I definitely have no problem putting $1,500 on the line with AA. If I can get all of my chips in at any point in the hand with the nuts at the time, then they're going to the middle--regardless of how deep my current stack is. But KK just is only second best starting hand. And, again, against a very loose and aggressive deep-stack, I won't say that I'd never do it. But with stacks that deep there's likely to be some escalation before it reaches that point, and I think it's much better here to control how much is at stake PF and get away from the hand if the flop doesn't offer some serious potential--again, not saying don't raise a bet with KK as overpair, or for that matter even with an A showing, which, in case of doubt does make AA less likely.

Basically, I do get into this kind of situation fairly often now, particularly since I've started just buying in for $600, and I may even increase that a bit. Ideally, I think it's a good play to have everyone at the table covered. But I think deep-stack play brings up some new issues for sure. I'm also not completely sure about something like bottom set against a tight opponent (depending on previous action, etc.). With stacks at 200xBB or more, I think you need to be much more picky about spots where you really want all of them in the middle--somewhat similar to the tournament principle of avoiding other big stacks. The exception in both cases is in the rare event that you have a monster.