When is a nut peddler not a nut peddler?

[Kyriefurro]

At first glance villain seemed like a classic nutpeddler (32/6/1.5). But then this hand happened.....

0.50/1 NLHE 6-max <font color="blue"> (6 players) </font>

Stacks:
Hero - $136
CO - $129.50

Hero is UTG w/ A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Preflop: Hero <font color="red"> raises to $4 </font>, MP folds, CO calls, Button calls, SB folds, BB folds

($13.50) Flop <font color="blue"> (3 players) </font>: 6 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
Hero bets $13, CO <font color="red"> raises to $39 </font>, Hero........?

I don't think he has KK, but a small set is possible.

[4_2_it]

A nut peddler is not 32/6. He could be raising a diamond draw. Since you have the A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] call and re-evaluate the turn. If you think villain has a small set then a [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] turn is very g00t for you.

[Kyriefurro]

[ QUOTE ]
A nut peddler is not 32/6.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this may be a question of sementics here. I see his type of profile (30ish/5-6/3-4 with a low WSD) frequently on the 6-max tables at Prima. They're semi-loose/passive preflop. If they don't hit the flop pretty hard they fold. If they do hit the flop they to their utmost to crucify any opponents who are dumb enough to call their bets. I've come to lable them "nut peddlers" although that may not be the official 2+2 lable heh.

The main difference from this villain and the "classic" profile is his post flop AF is much lower than "normal." His WSD of 20% fit the profile perfectly, though.

[4_2_it]

Okay, I'll buy a "Loose Pre-flop" moniker for this type of villain.

[ajmargarine]

The only hand I could see villian doing this with that you beat is AK...and you have two of the aces so the chances of him have that hand is lessened. Does KQ or KJ raise here? Does a flush draw raise this so strongly? (especially considering you have Ad)......

You are representing AK here at the least, and he is telling you that he can beat one pair. He's got 66, 33, or sometimes KK here most of the time. Unless I had a great read on the guy (more than numbers), I'd be inclined to fold.

45d, 67d, and KQ, KJ can all raise here. Because the King is a diamond however makes it less likely that villian is raising with a pair draw hand. That makes a diamond turn a little more appealing.

[Kyriefurro]

[ QUOTE ]
You are representing AK here at the least, and he is telling you that he can beat one pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is he? I can think of a number of hands that would raise PF and then fire a bet on this flop, if only to see where they are - any PP TT+, AQ, AJ, etc. The raise *could* be an attempt to snap off a C/B with any K.

That being said, I came very close to folding at this hand, just for the reasons you mentioned. A 1.5 post-flop AF, combined with only a 20% WSD tends to indicate that he'd only raise with a "real" hand - something that beats a pair of Kings (and Aces).

Insead I called, intending to fold he turn UI. Results:

($91.50) Turn <font color="blue"> (2 players) </font>: K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
Hero checks, CO checks [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

($91.50) River: 8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
Hero checks, CO bets $45, Hero calls

CO has 5 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] for the flush

I called this river mostly out of confussion. I just couldn't figure out what kind of hand villain would play this way. It seamed VERY unlikely that villain would raise with just a flush draw. It also seemed unlikely that if he had flopped a set, he'd check behind on the turn when he filled up. My best guess at the time was he had JJ or QQ and decided I didn't have a K.

I wonder if I could have avoided this mess by 3-betting the flop (something i considered) since it was pretty likely villain would fold almost everything but KK. I also wonder if it would have been worthwhile to attempt to bluff this river, since I had the A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], although that would probably not have worked.

hence I advocated pushing the flop. You let him take control of that hand. When you checked on the turn, all he had to do is bet and you're folding since you would be convinced that you're beat. Then you allowed him to value bet his hand on the river. You made a crying call when you knew damn well he outdrew you.

Also he made a substantial raise, in many cases hoping to push you out of the pot. If he had a set...he might do the miniraise or go to $30 or something, not wanting to push you out.

It's always hard to tell for sure though. I usually like to get away from things like this until I know what the player is like.

Those bastards usually just call the bet on the flop and wait until the river to raise/bet if checked to when they flop a set, which to me is stupid. I like to stack them right then and there. I'm praying to God he has AA or AK in this situation and I flopped a set because he's going to lose his stack right now. Although, I can see how you could think he flopped a set, he led into the raiser, who called him. Then gave the raiser some more rope to hang himself, i.e. checked the turn, then value bet the river. I would've bet the turn, however. I think OP has to fold after checking the turn, he's shown too much weakness. I would have bet the turn not being able to sell the hand on the river, however, villan here was able to sell his hand and the OP paid him off. I still do not understand that river call.