Did I overplay my TT v. UTG limp-raiser?

[ElSapo]

Party 2/4... Passivity seems to be the name of the game today. Lots of would be table-coaches ranting about others play, but calling raises with AJo. So, it's a normal day in Party-land.

UTG limps. Folded to me somewhere late enough to raise it up with the red tens. Back to UTG, he pops it again, and we take a flop for three bets each, heads up.

Rags.
He bets, I raise, he calls.
Rag.
He checks, I bet, he calls.
Rag, same action, and he wins with QQ.

I post this because of the QQ hand from the other day, where the queens went into check-call mode against a three-bet. Here I'm faced with an UTG limp-raiser, but the raiser goes passive on the turn. If he'd check-raised the turn, I'd have laid it down. But he went call-call.

Should I have checked behind on the river?

[Niceriver]

I would say, i really depends.. was he a tight or loose player? but a difficult hand, but i would have checked the river, to safe the last bet. dont think he have called the river HU to a 3 bettor pre-flop if he had only AK, AQ, ect... and i would not have set him on a low pair to raise out with (here minimun JJ to raise UTG if he is passive). So would have bet to river like you did, i you had top pair all the way, but then checked the river...

niceriver

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I would have checked the river. Unless he's got a SMALLER pocket pair, he's not likely to call you on the river with a worse hand. Any better hand certainly will not fold.

al

[Nottom]

Should I have checked behind on the river?
Unless he is the type to call a bet with unimproved AK, I think you can safely check behind.

[rkiray]

Like someone else said, this really depends on the player. You didn't give us any information. What would you have done if he check raised?

[John Biggs]

I think so. As we all know, an early-position limp-reraise from your average passive player means a big pair most of the time. So you have to figure your Tens are losing unless you flop a set. Your flop raise did get him to slow down, but probably wasn't positive expectation if you do all the math.

He wasn't being unduly passive by just flat-calling your raise and turn bet -- he was scared of KK and AA.

And when he's doesn't fold on the turn, you've got to check behind on the river in any case. Your hand is simply not very strong here.

[Bob T.]

It is hard to figure out exactly what he has. I think that it is interesting that he chose QQ to limpreraise with. That is exactly the hand that I would never make this play with, why try and make the pot big, so that everyone has the odds to outdraw you, with medium big pocket pair. I would rather raise with this hand, and hope to eliminate weak Aces and Kings, and make it more likely that my hand would stand up.

[ElSapo]

I thought it was pretty interesting as well. He limps with QQ, I rase with TT and he three-bets.

Ok, but when I don't cap it, you'd think he would discount AA and KK, right? Generally, anyways, there's probably some value in not capping against a thinking opponent, but...

When the flop, turn and river are rags, as long as he discounts AA and KK he must still believe he's ahead. And the fact that he just calls, when I didn't cap, would lead me to discount QQ because if I was in his position with QQ I'd be pretty sure I was in the lead.

Now, checking the river is probably still the right play.

But the play doesn't make sense. Unless he thinks I may not cap on AA or KK, he knows he's ahead. But doesn't bet/raise again. And because he doesn't bet/raise, I discount QQ.

Frankly, the whole thing doesn't make sense, if you actually try and make sense of it. Which is why I found it so interesting.

[Nottom]

Maybe he read the post about playing QQ according to HEFAP and got confused.

I see players shut down all the time when they get raised. I've raised a guy on the flop with top pair, bet the turn and had the river get checked through on a non threatning board only to be shown AA or KK more times than I can remember.

[brian0729]

I have not read any of the other replies, but I would have trouble checking the river. Only because of the limp re raise would I even consider it. That would only be for about a half a sec and I would have bet. Your opponent cost himself bets here.

[brian0729]

OK, now I have read the replies and checking could very well be the better play, but with no aggression from the limp re raiser I would probably bet one more time looking for a call from a worse pair.

[John Biggs]

What exactly about this scenario would make you think that the UTG player had a worse pair than your tens?

[John Biggs]

Not to be harsh here, but you seem to be justifying your play of the hand based on how you would have played QQ in that spot, or how QQ should "properly" be played by a rational player.

This may make you feel better, but it isn't winning poker. Concentrate instead on building opponent models based on observed behavior--i.e. how they play certain types of hands. You can also use your observations to construct a model of an opponent on the usual tight/loose passive/aggressive grid, so that even if you haven't seen him play a specific type of hand yet you have some idea of how he might prefer to play it.

In a more general sense you should become aware with experience that passivity is a ruling trait for many low-limit players. Therefore an outcome like this should no longer surprise you.

If you lack information about a specific opponent you do better to play a tad more conservatively with your fair or marginal hands, such as your Tens here. Your aim should be less to pump up the pot and more to get a look at his cards on the river. Information is power.

[ElSapo]

Betting the river, and not being able to put my opponent on a larger pocket pair, really stems more from a lot of weird limp-raising I've seen, when people suddenly raise it after they limped with a suited ace or a pair of 6s. Granted, that he was UTG and it wasn't a multi-way pot makes this less likely. But combining that, with the subsequent passivity, was enough to throw me off.

[elysium]

hi el
ok, this opponent makes a suspicious call on the flop after limp reraising the turn. there is a good/ tricky opponent that you can fight on river turf with here. whether or not that's the case el, i can't tell you. it sounds though like it might be the case.

if you check-down the turn, your call of his bet closes the action, and that's what would have happened here. if, on the other hand, he checks to you again, your bet will likely be called with AK and other hands that you beat, and a check-raise is highly unlikely even as a bluff.

in this situation, your judgement of all the factors can make checking down the turn correct when a good/ tricky player makes a suspicious flop call. in this situation, river turf fighting gives you the handle you need to make the right decision on the river frequently, when the decision is far from certain on the turn.