54s V is going to donk bet river more times than X/R river I feel.

Most V's at 10z will be trying to put as much money as poss in on every street, usually X/R the flop/turn with a set here. Don't think most people have the discipline to trap, especially with that river X makes me lean more towards 1p / 2p.

I'd call and hope he's holding TT / JJ or 2p of some description. Seen heaps of V's play an overpair the same way.

Unless he just merked you up with top set in which case your 300bb deep and its reasonably coolerish so I wouldn't be sweating it too hard.

Do we really think that any bigger set is going to check the river hoping for us to bet?

Snap call IMO

u sir are a nit

solid bump

This must've been like 40 pages back.

Well, very far from that You would hardly call me a nit, if you had a chance to play with me...

If you are not checking the river with a mid or top set to induce a bluff, you are probably very predictable. So, to your question - yes, I am checking a river with a higher set 75% of the time to exctract more value and balance my actions with nuts.

Considering the limits and standard villain, probably you are right...

Seems we're making a lot of assumptions about how villain plays nutted hands, and ignoring the obvious nutted line in front of us. Could argue for a call cos pot odds but otherwise... Nh imo.

when call pre then call river... if villain is not spewy enough to bluff or make a weired valuebet with AA or some 2pair, why flatting deuces in the first place ?

fwiw, I would tripple barrel here 22,33,77,99 maybe some AA , KK if flatted pre for value and AJs,AQs,KQs as bluff...
given the pot and raise size 22 is still top of my range... so i would not make an exploitive fold without KNOWING villain is super passive otr

This is 5 months old.

You seriously quoted one of the very worst strategy posters that actually posts regularly that I've seen in my 14 years on 2p2. He's so bad that I think/thought he was trolling every strat post and put him on my ignore list. Extra credibility

I thought he was one of the respected posters in BQ

First time I'm hearing this.

Well, obviously if villain bet/bet/bet, I'd happily stack off. The line he has taken was very different and screamed nuts to me. Coming to to exploitation, I don't think river fold with a bottom set vs a random micro zoom player is in any way exploitative. How often do you think he/she will be c/r me on the river when I have a bottom set?

Actually folding small pocket pair every time, ignoring set mining, makes no sense to me. How reasonable is it to actually remove one of the strongest weapons of Holdem from your arsenal just because you are weak post flop? No other explanation makes sense really.

Look, you call preflop with a low pair for three reasons:

1. Set mining. This is self explanatory - you hit, you win in 90% cases
2. It is hard to hit a pair and you could end up with the best hand by the turn/river when you villain gives up. Obviously you need to be a better hand reader to play your small pair post flop.
3. To exploit your villain who c/f every turn after CB the flop. Again, you need to be good at reading hands/stats.

Now, why on the earth would you remove this tool from your arsenal other than being weak post flop? And even then, purely on the pot odds/implied odds, it makes a lot of sense to call preflop if you are on the BTN and face a 2-3BB raise.

As played I'm always calling. Bigger hands are leading into you more often than x/r this river. If you are planning to fold to a RR on this river you should've just checked it back and moved on. You've built a decent pot already with bottom set. Plus it's zoom...

Alright. As I see most users believe I should have called. Only a few thought considering the action I could fold it. I wish we had a chance to see the results of those who post, to check validity of opinion. But probably opinions would be different even among the pros

Zombie thread, but since OP's actually here: 77 makes the most sense for villain to hold here but if you're not happy to see the money go in then it makes the case against folding a hand that plays as crappily as 22 pre-flop all the stronger. It's a hand where villain's entire range is 50% or better and you have no playability. It's actually really tough to make up for that kind of disadvantage even in position.

It's important not to think about it like this. If he had a bigger set, that does not mean that folding is correct. He may only rarely have a bigger set, consider the frequency at which he has worse or better.

I would call this river check raise. You're getting 3:1 odds on the call. His pot-sized raise on the river obligates you to call with the top 50% of your range or else you can be exploited.

Well, that's exactly what I thought when I mucked

Again, as I said, I don't think I will be exploited in a micro zoom on folding a hand on the river - there literally is a very low probability that I will be in the same situation with the same villain more than 10-20 times to make it an exploitative fold.

Coming to 3:1 odds, I don't really think my opp is actually c/r this river for a bluff 25% of the time - this line is absurd to take with a bluff so often.

But yes, if I thought he was bluffing so often, obv I have to call.