Did I miss a bet here?

[Psycho21]

30-60 in Biloxi. Most of the games down south are super passive, but being a little bit of a higher limit the players are a little more aggressive. The villain here however seems to be tight weak.
Villain raises utg, I raise with jj. I think there was one cold call.
Flop comes QJ9. He bets I raise, the other guy folds and he calls.
Turn is a rag all rainbow. He bets again I raise and he without waiting a second reraises. I call
River is a 9. he bets and I call. Should I have raised again turn or river?

[NLSoldier]

If you really had him pegged as weak tight then I think its fine. You can pretty much rule out KT for a weak tight player who was UTG, and a weak tight player probably would not 3bet the turn with KK or AQ. So that pretty much leaves AA, QQ and 99. AA is the only one you are ahead of and his line looks very strange for AA.

From the title of your post it sounds like you won, which leads me to believe your read of him being weak tight was off.

[Psycho21]

Thanks for the response NL
Actually he turned over Queens. My friend who was standing behind me called me a pussy, and said I should have crammed some more bets in. 9 out of 10 in that spot I raise again on the turn if not the river, but I was convinced that he had queens. I thought exactly what you said. He could not have K10 and I could not see this guy raising again with AA or KK.
Later on we brought the hand up to a really really good limit player that we know, and he said I should have raised him again on the sheer strength of my hand.
Any thoughts about that?

[TheBusiness]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the response NL
Actually he turned over Queens. My friend who was standing behind me called me a pussy, and said I should have crammed some more bets in. 9 out of 10 in that spot I raise again on the turn if not the river, but I was convinced that he had queens. I thought exactly what you said. He could not have K10 and I could not see this guy raising again with AA or KK. Later on we brought the hand up to a really really good limit player that we know, and he said I should have raised him again on the sheer strength of my hand.
Any thoughts about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

You had the 3rd nuts on the river. I raise at least once even if he is weak-tight. The hand is so strong. I would consider just calling a 3-bet instead of capping, but to not raise the river once is missing a bet the vast majority of the time. Nice read though.

[JasonP530]

You called the turn instead of throwing in another raise. Since you dont think he has KT, you must think youre beat on the turn(or against AA or KK). Nothing changes from the turn to the river if you dont have him on a made straight on the turn, so raising the river would be inconsistent if you stopped raising the turn.

[DpR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the response NL
Actually he turned over Queens. My friend who was standing behind me called me a pussy, and said I should have crammed some more bets in. 9 out of 10 in that spot I raise again on the turn if not the river, but I was convinced that he had queens. I thought exactly what you said. He could not have K10 and I could not see this guy raising again with AA or KK. Later on we brought the hand up to a really really good limit player that we know, and he said I should have raised him again on the sheer strength of my hand.
Any thoughts about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

You had the 3rd nuts on the river. I raise at least once even if he is weak-tight. The hand is so strong. I would consider just calling a 3-bet instead of capping, but to not raise the river once is missing a bet the vast majority of the time. Nice read though.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is that missign a value bet? If UTG is in fact weak tight, UTG his holdings are so limted. AA-JJ, AK, AQ is prob. it preflop. Once he three bets the turn I think we are 90%+ he has QQ or 99 and I guess some chance he has AA (but weak tight does NOT 3-bet this hand - or even think about three betting, that is scary board). So on the river I think it is close to 100% certain we are beat. Raising there is pissing away 2 BB.

I think this hand shows a bias that sometimes emerges on 2+2 to play strong hands aggressive in that face of clear defeat. This arises becasue so many people play PP15/30 where that is correct the vast majority of the time (not many true weak tighties on there). There have been several hands from live games where weak ttight players hands could be perfectly identified almost 100% on the river, yet advise was contrary to the read.

In this case, you KNOW he has qq or 99 - use that info, don't rasie because you have a boat. The true Poker MAster (not me) mucks this river......I woudl define this as 'expert laydown'. (All the above based on the fact that this guy is known for ceratin as a true weak tight player)

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the response NL
Actually he turned over Queens. My friend who was standing behind me called me a pussy, and said I should have crammed some more bets in. 9 out of 10 in that spot I raise again on the turn if not the river, but I was convinced that he had queens. I thought exactly what you said. He could not have K10 and I could not see this guy raising again with AA or KK. Later on we brought the hand up to a really really good limit player that we know, and he said I should have raised him again on the sheer strength of my hand.
Any thoughts about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

You had the 3rd nuts on the river. I raise at least once even if he is weak-tight. The hand is so strong. I would consider just calling a 3-bet instead of capping, but to not raise the river once is missing a bet the vast majority of the time. Nice read though.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is fuzzy thinking imo. Just because your hand is strong doesn't mean you should ignore your opponents range of hands. He knew his opponent well enough to vastly narrow his range of hands to the point where raising would have been a -EV play.

What hand can he put his opponent on that you say he is missing a bet against?

edit-didn't see DpR's reply above, oh well.

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the response NL
Actually he turned over Queens. My friend who was standing behind me called me a pussy, and said I should have crammed some more bets in. 9 out of 10 in that spot I raise again on the turn if not the river, but I was convinced that he had queens. I thought exactly what you said. He could not have K10 and I could not see this guy raising again with AA or KK.
Later on we brought the hand up to a really really good limit player that we know, and he said I should have raised him again on the sheer strength of my hand.
Any thoughts about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Another consideration that points to your read being correct is that he didn't 4bet preflop which he would most likely do with aces and kings.

[TheBusiness]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the response NL
Actually he turned over Queens. My friend who was standing behind me called me a pussy, and said I should have crammed some more bets in. 9 out of 10 in that spot I raise again on the turn if not the river, but I was convinced that he had queens. I thought exactly what you said. He could not have K10 and I could not see this guy raising again with AA or KK. Later on we brought the hand up to a really really good limit player that we know, and he said I should have raised him again on the sheer strength of my hand.
Any thoughts about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

You had the 3rd nuts on the river. I raise at least once even if he is weak-tight. The hand is so strong. I would consider just calling a 3-bet instead of capping, but to not raise the river once is missing a bet the vast majority of the time. Nice read though.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is that missign a value bet? If UTG is in fact weak tight, UTG his holdings are so limted. AA-JJ, AK, AQ is prob. it preflop. Once he three bets the turn I think we are 90%+ he has QQ or 99 and I guess some chance he has AA (but weak tight does NOT 3-bet this hand - or even think about three betting, that is scary board). So on the river I think it is close to 100% certain we are beat. Raising there is pissing away 2 BB.

I think this hand shows a bias that sometimes emerges on 2+2 to play strong hands aggressive in that face of clear defeat. This arises becasue so many people play PP15/30 where that is correct the vast majority of the time (not many true weak tighties on there). There have been several hands from live games where weak ttight players hands could be perfectly identified almost 100% on the river, yet advise was contrary to the read.

In this case, you KNOW he has qq or 99 - use that info, don't rasie because you have a boat. The true Poker MAster (not me) mucks this river......I woudl define this as 'expert laydown'. (All the above based on the fact that this guy is known for ceratin as a true weak tight player)

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I should explain my thinking on this hand since everyone seems to disagree with me. I think even a weak-tight player is capable of 3-betting the turn with AA or KK. If your read is that this guy is SO weak-tight that he would be incapable of 3-betting an overpair in a situation like this one, then you can also be pretty sure you are behind, or at best a coin toss, preflop when he raises under the gun. In other words, if your read on this guy is that he is really THAT weak-tight, then I think this is a preflop fold. Someone that weak-tight does not raise under the gun without AA, KK, QQ, AK, or maybe AQs (He might also raise JJ, but you have it). You are losing badly to the first three of these hands, and only a marginal favorite over the other two. Someone that weak-tight would not have raised 99 UTG. The only hand you are losing to is therefore QQ. If you're THAT sure he has it, you are a much better player than I, but I'd put in a river raise with what I think is effectively the second nuts (since I wouldn't put someone that weak-tight on an UTG raise with 99). The expert laydown in this hand is the preflop laydown, not a river laydown. I don't mean this in any type of rude way, but your preflop play is inconsistent with your uber-weak-tight read on the UTG raiser. Either you got excited to get JJ and 3-bet preflop without remembering how weak-tight he was, or you are justifying your own weak-tight river play after the fact because you ended up losing to QQ and feel good that you saved yourself a couple of bets.

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I should explain my thinking on this hand since everyone seems to disagree with me. I think even a weak-tight player is capable of 3-betting the turn with AA or KK.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can greatly discount the odds of him having aces or kings because he didn't 4bet preflop