77 meets flop aggression (20-40)

[kerpowski]

Bunky,

If your read is that he most likely does not have a K or 5 do you see any value to calling BB's flop c/r, raising any non-ace turn and checking the river through?

[bunky9590]

[ QUOTE ]
If your read is that he most likely does not have a K or 5 do you see any value to calling BB's flop c/r, raising any non-ace turn and checking the river through?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats another great line to take. This cat isn't a big follow through the turn bet on a bluff guy though. If I call the checkraise, he is reluctant to fire the second barrel. I said he was decent, not good. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

But, yeah, considered it. The other thought I had was making him fold a hand like 99 or TT with that much action. Yes, he could lay down the best hand and probably would not reraise a hand below Jacks unless he was trying to trap. He might very well toss those in the muck to a flop three bet with a king on board and me not slowing down on the turn.

he seemed genuinely pissed that he "had" to lay down his hand.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
If he's that passive, then it doesn't matter whether you bet/check or check/call.

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe I'm misreading this but as worded it most certainly does matter whether bunky bet- checks or check-calls against a passive oppoent (although I thought bunky just said he was alright postflop), even more so the tighter his opponent is postflop.

[DrGutshot]

bet and check behind the river seems prety clear to me.

-DrG