[DpR]

[ QUOTE ]
You MAY have a point, but your current sample size in this "we fold too much in big pots and we actually had the best hand"=1, and of course it is a self-selected sample.

Look, you lost. You folded a winner. Just because you folded a winner here doesn't mean you are ahead more than 7% of the time this happens. Heck, you could be behind 99% of the time in this situation, but guess what? 1% of the time, you'll still be folding the best hand. What can I say, weird stuff happens, don't look to make "big laydowns" for the sake of doing it, but just continue to think about your opponents, the hands they can have, the action, and the pot size when making your decision, don't decide that because you lost a big pot for 1 bet, you need to call every river bet because someone "might" be making a move.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have done none of what you are saying. First, I didnt consider this a big laydown at all - I thought it was an easy one (given the overcaller). Second, I have posted several times that I never fold to retards (BB in this scenario), and many people have replied that that is a bad policy. I catch these retarded plays all the time, it is not a sample size of 1 - I just almost never fold away a pot.

The point was, I thought this was an easy fold. Compared to the recent sentiment on this board, I tend toward favoring calling rivers more then the rest of posters, who advocate folding in situation where the % chance of winning was clearly greater than mine in this hand.

Obviously, 1 hand PROVES nothing. I was jsut using it as anecdotal evidence against a trend of recent post advice suggesting river folds.

As for this lost pot, it is difficult as a thinking player to combat a thinking player making what seems to me a non-thinking play (calling this river with A high). That is the play that led me to make my mistake, nothing the BB did.