This fold may seem weak... but is it sensible?

[ryanghall]

Party 100 NL.

I get K /images/graemlins/club.gif 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in the BB.

All fold to the SB (34/4), who completes. I check.

Flop (2 players) ($2) is:

4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 2 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

He checks, I bet $2, he calls.

Turn (2 players) (about $6)

Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif

He checks, I check.

River (2 players, $6)

K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

He bets $15, I fold.

I am pretty sure he has the flush here. How about you?

[zaxx19]

It doesnt seem weak at all....thats an auto muck.

If he wants to bet over 2X the pot on a bluff out of position no less; let him........hell be broke soon enough.

[DWarrior]

I'm not an expert, but I'd have done the same thing. If he bet something less, I could understand, but the risk/reward in your case doesn't seem worth it. If he's trully a bad player and stuck around with KJ or something to your $2 bet and now overbet the pot when he paired, I'm sure you'll get him soon enough.

[swolfe]

pretty weak. your check on the turn after betting the flop could have induced a bluff from a Q or a naked K or any other garbage.

[zaxx19]

A bluff of 2.5X the pot? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[DWarrior]

I don't know if 100NL tables are capable of having a bluff induced, quite honestly.

EDIT: I think it's much more likely that, at these stakes, someone would be inclined to slowplay with even the weakest of flushes. I think that for every time someone bluffs like this, there'd be 10 situations where they're slowplaying a hand.

Also, it'd make things a lot easier if you continued to bet on the turn. If he made the flush, he may have called and checked it on the turn (trying to get fancy and check-raise), where you could just check. If he raised, it'd be an easy fold, and it'd probably cost you only $3 more, which is pretty cheap. If he had nothing, he'd most likely lay it down. The only two really bad situations is if he paired the Queen, and on the river bet the same amount he did, and you'd lay down your two-pair, or if your action on turn caused him to bet less with his flush, so he'd probably get a call from you on the river.

[swolfe]

[ QUOTE ]
A bluff of 2.5X the pot? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

why not?

a huge overbet like this almost never wants a call, so disappoint him. you have a decent hand for the blind battle.

[zaxx19]

Im pretty sure even fish know that bluffing the pot or 1.5X the pot will fold out the same hands as massively overbetting the pot by a ridiculous degree.

Most people give those donkeys too much credit, you sir are starting to(wince) underestimate them.


(vomit bc I just said that)

[poboy]

I think you need to continue betting the turn, it would make the river so much easier to play. There are 3 likely possible outcomes if you bet the turn.

1> he raises and you can easily muck it
2> he calls and puts in a large bet on the river and you can easily muck it
3> he calls and checks the river and you can check behind

Oh yeah and he might fold. JMO

[TheWorstPlayer]

Bet the turn.

[DWarrior]

That's what I said, but my style tends to be overly-agressive. I find that many people play passive post-flop, even the consistent winners, so I was reluctant to push my opinion. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks a bet on the turn would simplify things.