How would you play this on the river?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
if you check, i think you need to fold. basically you're hoping he either has KQ, QQ or AQ that will bet this river. QQ/AQ are doubtful given play so far. i think all other hands that are betting here have you beat. so i think you need to value bet this river and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree that villain will be betting only hands we beat on the river here and hence checking implies folding. It's certainly close, and the more I think about villain's supposed range the more I realize we're in pretty bad shape here, but the pot is large and I don't think we can ever be sure enough of villain's range to merit folding such a good hand after checking the river.

I disagree that AQ is unlikely here. Many players would raise the flop here with two big cards and a gutshot and would peel on the river (the pot is pretty big). QQ is not that likely true, but some players are quite unable to lay down big pairs, and villain may even bet such a hand if checked to in the hope of folding a K (remember, villain is good post-flop and may be capable of some trickery).

I agree with your general premise, though, that checking and calling is not good here. Basically, that allows villain to pretty much play the river close to optimally, as he'll likely check behind a bunch of hands he might call with on the river if we bet. I really don't like having to fold this hand at any point but if villain's range is really as tiny as OP is making it out to be we can fold to a raise and so I'm okay with that.

[sean c]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you check, i think you need to fold. basically you're hoping he either has KQ, QQ or AQ that will bet this river. QQ/AQ are doubtful given play so far. i think all other hands that are betting here have you beat. so i think you need to value bet this river and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree that villain will be betting only hands we beat on the river here and hence checking implies folding. It's certainly close, and the more I think about villain's supposed range the more I realize we're in pretty bad shape here, but the pot is large and I don't think we can ever be sure enough of villain's range to merit folding such a good hand after checking the river.

I disagree that AQ is unlikely here. Many players would raise the flop here with two big cards and a gutshot and would peel on the river (the pot is pretty big). QQ is not that likely true, but some players are quite unable to lay down big pairs, and villain may even bet such a hand if checked to in the hope of folding a K (remember, villain is good post-flop and may be capable of some trickery).

I agree with your general premise, though, that checking and calling is not good here. Basically, that allows villain to pretty much play the river close to optimally, as he'll likely check behind a bunch of hands he might call with on the river if we bet. I really don't like having to fold this hand at any point but if villain's range is really as tiny as OP is making it out to be we can fold to a raise and so I'm okay with that.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have about 30 hours with this guy and had seen him limp a number of times with AK-AJ off and JJ and lower. He pretty much plays abc poker post flop and value bets the monkeys relentlessly i had never seen him get out of line but 95% behind i wasn't sure but i bet/folded without hesitation and felt funny about it later hence the post. The next time i see him i am going to ask him what he had maybe he will tell the truth. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I guess its closer than i thought it was while playing the hand.