Tough to fold now that we are here, but eyurus is right -- if he called down with top pair and didn't bet, this is a fold at least on turn.

coming in late to the party.

i think this boils down to either you think the 72 hand changes his mindset to someone that would be looking to bet his stack with any TP hand or it did nothing.

if yes to changing his mindset, then call him down because he could see your previous bluff as 'i need to teach him a lesson' type situation, so he's going to go the distance, betting any TP hand or even ATC just to stick it in your face when you fold.

if no to changing his mindset, then just fold on the flop because he hasnt changed his ways based on your 72 hand and passive Vs showing strength is usually not a bluff.

with that being said, you got to the river, so basically you thought he was FOS, so call because there is a non zero chance he has complete air, make him show his K7o and scoop

also, just from a mathematical standpoint:
-- its 120 to win 400
-- which is 3.33:1
-- which is only 23% equity needed.

it would not be hard to construct a range that V has that we are 23% against, especially considering the last hand.

edit: we have 24% equity to win vs a very tight range of {AA,JJ,55,AJs+,A5s,AJo+,A5o}

once you add in FD/SDs bricking (not shown), possible worse Axs, we're blowing his range out of the water. if he can have A6o to win with a rivered 2P, then he can have every Ax above A6, which we're 50/50 with

Board: A5J*8*6
*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG****50.72%**46.38%***4.35%*{ AcKs }
UTG+1**49.28%**44.93%***4.35%*{ AA, JJ, 55, A5s+, A5o+ }

This is a good point. I only show hands when it will make the table go in the direction I want them to. For example, at a loose, call happy table, if I happen into a good bluffing spot, I would show it because it makes the table even more call happy vs me. If I'm at a table that is overly nitty post, I would only consider showing hands where I was nutted the entire time to reinforce their beliefs that they should be nitty. You want tables to be at one extreme or the other. In the middle isn't good for you.

This is a classic problem where we have equity to call every individual street v his range but if you put his range v the post flop total odds we got it would have been an easy fold. So even if this range is right we can lose money in the long run with it marginal hand because strong hands get us in but weaker hands give up on an earlier street

Sent from my LG-D855 using 2+2 Forums

If you showed the 72 to get them to play looser vs. you, you have to call down.

Haven't had computer access the last few days and didn't wanna reply on phone. Will

get to some of the replies and then post results:

I was not tilted. I haven't played 72, nor have I shown a bluff, in over 6 months. It was just one of those "last hand" things at the end of the night.

It was my "last hand" at 5am vs. a bunch of random nits I've never played with before

and likely won't see again. I just wanted to get a rise out of them and showed 72 for

kicks. Wasn't a meta-game strategy as I wasn't planning on playing the next hand.

This is a really good point and the reason I think I may have been outplayed on the hand. V made it very enticing to call each individual street, effectively trapping me in the hand with good pot odds with a dominated hand. Not sure if he intentionally knew what he was doing or just got lucky. Also, not sure if the hand would have played out much differently if he had AQ/AT.

This is also a good point, but only if V is competent enough to check/call all the way down to the river. But I think he knows I'm not the type to 3-barrel bluff so perhaps he was looking at expediting the process. Also - he wouldn't be able to get stacks in unless he check-called/check-called/check-raised the river.

Results

Villains at 1/2 rarely adjust and when they do it's by calling more. The majority of the time they are playing the 2 cards in there hand.

I think your bluff mind f-ed you more than your opponent. =) Lesson is either that a loose calling station getting aggro = our one pair hand is no good OR don't show our cards because if we have a good line on our opponents, we don't know if/how showing them cards will affect their play and unpredictable players are harder to play against.

This... (And well stated)

Sort of reminds me of the self leveling that takes place when a guy makes some "tricky" preflop play like limping QQ and then stacks off post because he thinks he under repped his hand vs some guy who is barely paying attention to what he repped or under repped... He just knows he had 2p or whatever.

^ agree with both of you. As soon as the hand was over my immediate first thought was "I just mind-fk leveled myself." Normally I would have just pitched this on the flop or turn without hesitation. Ah well - lesson learned.