Last hand from bad run

[rkiray]

9 handed 2/4 table, 41% seeing flop. UTG is tight passive (22/12)

I'm UTG + 2 with AA

UTG raise, UTG + 1 folds, I raise, folded to UTG who raises, I decide just to call, to disguise my hand, plus this guy is not a maniac by a long shot.

Flop : 4Q4r

bet, raise, raise, raise, call. Almost the same pattern as the other hands. At least I'm the last raiser this time.

Turn : J

check, bet, call,

Things are looking a little better now.

River K

Bet, I just call and lose to Ks full.

Wow, I'm kind of surprized how similar some of these hands looked. Maybe I shouldn't be. I used Pokerstat to find hands that I had played in the last week where I had reraised and lost. This was about all I could find. Much to my surprize most of the hands I reraised with I won (I guess that's normal). Maybe I picked the wrong hands to look at. Maybe I should be looking at hands I played passively? Comments?

[lil']

This hand is different from the last two, where you overplayed your hands. This is just a bad beat. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[rkiray]

yeah, I played better here, but none of the hands would I consider a bad beat. Like I said in the first post, I was running bad, but no terrible beats and no terrible sessions. Just a long slow slide. I think the worst beat was the semi-maniac who called with 29o in the sb when I had QQ in the bb. But this is what semi-maniacs do. And I'm glad to play against them. All my other opponents played their hands as they should. I just didn't win.

[rkiray]

Actually the main reason I could play this one correctly was because of the opponent. I had played hundreds of hands against him and knew how he played. The only hand he would play like this would be KK (normally I would say AA or KK, but I had AA so I was pretty sure he had KK). It's much easier to read a weak tight player than a semi-maniac. And it's fairly easy to play against someone when you know what cards they have.