AKo vs. a loose defender

[BoxLiquid]

There may be times where he actually does have AQ. But if you were in this position a hundred times I think more than 50% of the time he will have bet out a losing hand by how the board and betting looks.

Which means raising is profitable in the long run. It sounds right in theory (I think) but I don't know if it's the best advice.

I would look for more answers on that hand. NH

If he is a strong player he would know that <font color="green"> YOU </font> aren't scared of a backdoor flush and would know you would bet. Which means he can check-raise with AQ.

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
If he is a strong player he would know that <font color="green"> YOU </font> aren't scared of a backdoor flush and would know you would bet. Which means he can check-raise with AQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd imagine he was going for a bet/3-bet, more than he feared I'd check the river behind. I think he should have basically figured out that I had a full house, by now.

I think a checkraise might be a good play for SB. There's a good chance UTG missed and isn't paying off any more bets (and if he's hung in this long with an ace he probably won't fold it now anyway). And, in fact, I would have bet if checked to and called a checkraise.

By the way (given Villain's actual river lead), I need to be good over half of the time to raise, unless I can confidently fold to a 3-bet. (And that's not a fold I'm capable of making.) The reason for this is that Villain will always 3-bet AQ but will often just call when he only has trips.

[badbill7]

actually like your cryin hand better only because with read on player you have to put him on aq and nothin else.nice read. river cards are evil

[mtdoak]

This is a standard bet/call, and call the river situation. Its a scary board, but betting for value when your heads up here vs a loose player is a must. Could he have hit the straight? Yes. Could he bluff that he hit the straight? Yes. Will he call you down with worse. Absolutly.