Distinctive betting pattern: what's he got?

[george w of poker]

i think in the ciaffone book, he says that when an opponent does something confusing with his betting you can usually put him on the obvious (big in this case) hand.

[PuppetMaster]

[ QUOTE ]


I think the best explanation is a very big hand that is not sure of how to play but wants to get money in.




[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, in my experience they normally play TT-QQ in the same manor. They dont have the stomach to reraise pre-flop, but dont want to fold. On the flop they think they have something, but arent confident enough to play it strongly, and end up playing weak-tight.

[Nottom]

If I had to guess I would say they have sets and want to make sure they get all their money in against a raiser by making smallish bets instead of 3-betting the flop and showing strength and maybe pushing him of his hand.

[theBruiser500]

I think something important to note is that on the first hand the player doesn't have a set on the flop. I don't think I've ever seen someone lead out with an oversized bet on the flop into the raiser with a set. In fact, I'm surprised he led out on the turn with such a big bet.

danny

[Nottom]

True, I really didn't notice the pot size in the first hand. But it certainly fits what he actually had in that case.

[Magician]

He has the goods and the call raise and bet play works for him because the money is shallow.

[Acesover8s]

[ QUOTE ]
To me, this betting pattern is inconsistent. An EP player has bet, been raised heavily, and called. Then he bets the turn when an apparently irrelevant card hits. There's no reason to do this: most likely the flop raiser will bet again. I think the best explanation is a very big hand that is not sure of how to play but wants to get money in.

Next time I see this, I will be folding if I don't have a monster.

Guy.


[/ QUOTE ]

Next time I play against you I will be betting this way. . . unless I have a monster. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Aces