Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

If he's going to be fearful of a set whenever some high cards hit the board then he has no business being in the pot... I don't really think it's a great thing to get people to "play back at me" with better hands than mine.

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

What about with worse hands than yours?

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

If I think he has a worse hand then I'm not going to freak out and try to get to showdown without investing anymore money.

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

Allowing him to continue bluffing is not freaking out. And just because there may be a decent chance that he has a worse hand doesn't mean that we have to take a line that causes us to go broke the times that he has us beat, right?

Edit: What's your alternative line? And I think my comments are more directed towards a BobboFitos type of 2+2er or a TheWorstPlayer type of 2+2er and not necessarily a generic 2+2er. It would help to know who this guy is or a more specific read.

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

TWP,

soah obviously wants to stick in a bunch of money and get insta called by A2

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

I don't think the actual play of the hand ended up being terrible, but I hate the logic that was used throughout. Minraising preflop four hands in a row doesn't make sense, and with the exception of shortstack/all-in situations, I can honestly say that I have never raised preflop with AK with the plan of reraising anyone that comes over the top of me. AK is not a big hand and this is just LAG chip-spewing.

When the flop comes out the 2+2er is doing everything imaginable to telegraph a very marginal holding, yet our Hero is seeing monsters. There is virtually nothing given in the form of hand reading (other than "I think he might have a set") and all the decisions are based upon the thought process of "I have a marginal hand, and I have a couple of nut outs that I don't want to let go of, so I'll just try to hit them as cheap as possible." At the start of the hand Hero though he had a great image to play a big pot with AK with, but now suddenly there is no longer any consideration given to his image, and nothing at all is written about what his opponent might put him on at any point in the hand. He has hit an action board and he's just thinking about his own cards and using TPTK as a bluff catcher.

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

The problem is that TPTK IS only a bluff catcher on an AJT board. On a K98 two-tone board, I would be much happier going nuts on the flop.

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

soah you have a real disconnect in your logic

feeling you have the best hand given the action and a hand worth raising are not the same thing

"hit an action board" ? no idea wtf that is supposed to mean and why it's a good thing for the hero

usually an action board is meant to refer to a board where multiple players can have strong hands and strong draws -- ie you generally want to have more than one pair on an action board

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

Action boards are places where you are not WA/WB and the betting in this hand makes it look very much like Hero is ahead, yet he makes no effort to put his opponent on a hand or to protect his hand.

Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
 

Would be nice to have a read stronger than "2+2er". If this is BobboFitos, you should re-raise preflop.

I didn't want to put 2+2ers name on since I'll post results, in case he wouldn't want me to. He doesn't post too much on 2+2, so saying who he is I don't think would effect the way anyone here would play the hand, because I don't think anyone on the forum would have a real good idea of how he plays.

I think there was maybe 4-5 2+2ers at our table at one point though. BobboFitos was at the table, but he wasn't in the hand.