Evans described 1! hand he observed from villain. Still the overwhelming majority thinks they got a good enough read on villain to be almost certain he basically never raises worse than TpTk on this board.

I guess we are likely massively overcbetting such a dry board like most, and only continuing with QQ and 99 (If we even raise 99 pre over limpers) vs a raise...

nah - but the cold call behind me was pretty alarming. Also I haven't seen this guy raise once, so a weak passive raise usually equals massive hand. I suppose his hand might of been massive in his mind.

If I had a better read it would of been an easy jam. Just such a ****ty spot

Grunch.

I think it's pretty bad to put that much of your stack in in a spot where you have fundamentally sound value and then let go. I think we all tend to remember the times we lost with TPTK, and then with our 20/20 hindsight think, "Well, you know, I guess I could have found a fold there."

If we reduce it to sets and the OESD, you're a 48:52 dog. To me, it looks A LOT like JT and he thinks half his stack is enough to maximize FE. Like he's doing half now and half on turn.

I think everyone (well, almost) can agree that he probably shoves the turn. So I think if we take a card off and an 8 or K comes, we can comfortably fold. I tend to think that's the best line through the hand.

It sucks to put another 80 in in a 1/2 game thinking that you may release OTT. But given the current pot size, I don't think it's horrible. We may get another 80 from the station with his QT suited or whatever.

Of course. On flop, he has two cards to come and feels he has outs. On turn, he has one card to come, and can get away more easily.

I see it all the time: "I would have called had you shoved flop, now I have to fold."

This makes the KQ story even more believable. Besides, KQ makes perfect sense.

Sorry, but I would never fold in this spot against this guy, especially after the other hand.

We have position. He is likely jamming 100% of turns. He just put 50% of his stack in on flop.

Only hands he will fold on turn. Are pure zero equity bluffs. Which he will also fold to flop raise.

So even though it is a mute point. He is not more likely to GII on flop vs turn.

I disagree. Once we call his raise on flop, alarm bells have to be going off. Most players aren't good enough to jam turn if they aren't positive they are ahead, and he would no longer be positive (unless he does have a set, in which case it is a MOOT point).

If we think he will call flop or turn equally, and we think we are ahead now, why not just jam now? Why give him an out or let him catch up without putting the money in?

Hands in particular?

whenever someone raises the flop with say a set and someone folds, they never say they had a set because they wanted the call so they say they had TPWK or something like that to make the player feel like he made a bad fold.

I think it's a good fold (especially in a vacuum).

That is opening Pandora ' s box.

F.w.i w

I lie about hands all time. Part of game.

I lie about hands all the time, too, but saying I had KQ in this spot is not a lie I would make, especially if I didn't know my opponents hand. It's pointless.

I would tell them I had a set (whether I had one or not), good fold, etc., so the next time I did it they'd be very worried.

Of course, the last time I told the truth about my hand, nobody believed me (two people even said they had Kings, when I had a set of Kings, so impossible), so it is moot.

no its not pointless at all, because the next time he raises with a big hand he wants us to call and he might get a call from us thinking it's only top pair weak kicker again.

Top pair second kicker isn't that weak of a hand in NL. To call, we'd have to have top/top or better. Let's hope he gets that lucky. We folded this time, and he doesn't even know it.

It really doesn't matter, I know. I would never have folded to him, though, so I would have found out what he had -- or he would have mucked and I'd know it didn't bet top/top

ya i don't think i would of folded if the guy behind me didn't just call - even though he was a station - I was just in a bad spot with 150bb effective.

I don't really like blasting off that much on just top pair. I have before but only vs players who I play with a lot - not unknowns.

given how he played KJ I would categories him as weak/passive. Weak/passive players dont c/r on a dry board with less then TP or a set when it goes bet call.

TP and set are not the same thing.

Are for me today. Both lose to flush on river.

Really ? KQ is slightly worse than 99 or 55 here? Bad players lie all the time about their hands once you fold since they want to increase chances to get called the other time.

sorry, I meant Two pair not Top pair my bad

If he wants to induce future call, he would lie about having a bad hand, not a hand as strong as KQ.

If he wants to induce future fold, he would lie about having a very strong hand, not a hand that's as weak as KQ.

Do you routinely raise people out of dry board with 2pair+?

If he wants to be seen as a competent player who doesn't get out of line, but doesn't need to have a very strong hand to raise, what should he say?

I am sure this is for another thread, but if I get a fold and lie about my hand, I always want them to think I was as strong as possible. I rarely talk about my hands, though.

You probably figured that out already. Isn't that who you are in this forum?

I m not a weak/passive player , so why would that matter? I just dont see the guy have anything other than Q9, 55 or 99 here, maybe he has KQ 1 time out of 10, but the other 9 times he has those hands. Maybe im wrong, but thats my general experience with passive players.