[citanul]

durrr,

if you know "what's going on on the flop" and your opponent knows "what's going on on the flop" and you know that his action is directly related to "knowing what's going on on the flop," wouldn't you agree that it might be a necessity for those of us trying to analyze the hand to have some clue of what additional factors mahatma is taking into account before we can consider putting him on a range of hands or possible actions? understanding much of the analysis of mahatma hands comes from simply saying "my hand is top pair, he often puts in huge bets with much less, i'll call anything," i really don't like looking at the hands in such a way. when there's more information about what's driving his decisions that you are aware of and are not telling us, it's very difficult to think through the hand.

if you didn't want to tell us about what the thing about the bb player is that makes you bet this flop, i think it would have been wise to not tell us the identity of the player, and instead tell us the relevant information about the player that drives your decision making throughout.

c