When someone calls pre and then checks twice don’t worry he is trapping.

I have been supplementing my income by playing poker for 20 years, at times being my only source of income. I teach when I can and learn the rest of the time.

Frankly, I think you're being very arrogant! I've read many of your posts and, like others, I disagree with your analysis in multiple spots.

Well, I'll agree with one thing you said ... you're clearly not learning here.

Yes I am being a little arrogant I will concede that. Glad someone noticed. That was intentional. Love to get people like you in a live cash game so I can table talk you into making some really bad hero calls when I put you on tilt.

I in no way think I am good enough to be "teaching" for money. I am trying to inject a little more conversation and depth of discussion into strategy than what I have generally seen on this forum. Most of what I read here is just I would call because the opponent is a fish or I would fold because he is a tight regular or I would call because of pot odds.

Often there is way too much focus put on describing our opponent as if our read on the opponent is relevant in every hand or that we can always come to a correct decision based upon stereotyping our opponent. Yes this is a very important part of the game. But rather than saying my opponent is a MAWG who plays passive, lets go beyond this and say more specifically he opens too wide from early position or defends wide against a three-bet. How do we plan on exploiting this particular villain generally and how will that influence which decision we make post-flop? Will he bluff too much if we check or call too much with middle and bottom pair? If he is passive, we may be able to get some free cards with our draws or bottom pair hands to beat him.

Anyway, I generally love some controversy and will often play devil's advocate in most conversations. Not saying I am doing that here. I generally think my advice is usually sound. But my arrogance was intentional.

I will take all of your group comments under consideration. But I think the proof is in the pudding. Most of my reads have been spot on. This example was no exception. Now, had others advocated we continue to check call because they felt we were likely ahead and we wanted him to keep betting with his worse king, then that is a reasonable strategy. But most were saying we are likely beat but we call anyway. That mentality is not a good strategy.

Over 90% of the hand histories posted on this forum are because the OP doesn't have this level of information. If the OP had this information, they wouldn't need to make a thread.

That is why you don't see many long time regulars post hand histories.

The fact that you felt that it was relevant to your credentials as an experienced professional player to declare that you had back to back wins for $2k, really just tells the experienced players in the room the opposite of what you intended.

The arrogance is annoying, yes. Please stop.

Flop is actually a cbet, not a check. If we dont improve at all then we check both turn and river. River is a check back under every circumstance besides trip Jacks/flush. This way we tax the draws, get value from stations, and feign owning ourselves vs a king.

And definitely not raising turn. Never pay for information.