What’s Your Play? Underrepresented Top Pair

What's Your Play?My main event run came to an end early on Day 3 in unspectacular fashion. I do, however, currently have an above average stack going into the $5000 Venetian Deep Stacks main event. I don’t think any hands from those tournaments are as instructive as this one, though.

This is from a $2/$5 NLHE game at Red Rock, currently playing 9-handed. Most of the table, including Villain, are regulars in the room and fairly typical mid-stakes amateurs, which is to say a little too loose in small pots, a little too tight in big pots, and way too predictable in general. Hero (me) is probably perceived as an over-aggressive guy from the internet, with lots of raising, re-raising, and c-betting. The one hand Villain has seen me play for stacks saw me limp-re-raise Ad 9d UTG in a straddled pot, then bet-call about $800 on a Tc Td 5d flop.

Hero ($2000) straddles the button for $10. Villain ($600) raises to $30 in middle position. Hero calls Kc 8c, and BB ($1000) calls.

Flop ($90) 9c 9s 7c. BB checks, Villain bets $30, Hero calls, BB folds.

Turn ($150) Kd. Villain checks, Hero checks.

River ($150) 4h. Villain bets $120, Hero?

Post your thoughts and questions here. I’ll do my best to keep up with them during the week and will post my own thoughts as well as the results on Friday.

36 thoughts on “What’s Your Play? Underrepresented Top Pair

  1. I raise here a lot. We can rep a lot of bluffs here (8T, Axcc, etc.)although not sure if that matters against this villain. He should have very few K’s in his range here IMO. We can get looked up here by TT-QQ…maybe smaller pairs too. I maybe even r/f to $275 as I just don’t think he is ever 3b <K6.

    Note: I am a guy who doesn't mind value-owning myself a lot.

  2. i prefer betting 1/3 psb on turn to induce calls from unbelieving second-best hands along with possibly inducing air hands to spazz raise. then firing again on river for about 1/2 psb with the plan toward folding to a check-raise.

    as played, seems like a trivial snap call. folding seems only marginally bad (and contigent on game flow/history). raising seems awful as villain’s thin value town range is miniscule (a few really weirdly played pocket pairs) relative to his air range (busted draws) and monster range (9x, 44, 77). villain is unlikely to fold out AK/KQ/KJ.

    • Think you are overlooking how underrepped Hero is. Also I think we rep a lot more air/bluffy combos than Villain. Obv if he is incapable of betting without TP then this may even be a fold…but if he can ever value bet TT-QQ here seems like we can raise.

      I admit we value own ourselves a lot here.

      • i value cut myself on the reg, and i’m still inclined to think this is a bad spot to pull out the razor.

  3. I think I like shrug/flatting. I actually think we’re bad most of the time here because of villain’s sizing, but the chance villain chose an odd bluff size or is just spewing gives us sufficient odds to call. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a slowplayed 9x or a good Kx (that he didn’t feel like getting raised OTT with).

    Villain’s river sizing is odd, after all: he’s played flop and turn weakly, and our play was similarly weak, so if he’s trying to get a crying call, he should be betting less, and similarly he should be bluffing smaller as well (around half pot should do). I think theory also dictates he should be betting smallish here. All of this should skew us towards being tighter than usual: if villain is making a sizing mistake, then we exploit him by taking his large bet when we do have a hand, and folding more than usual because he’s laying us worse odds. But our hand seems too strong to fold and probably does fit as a better-than-average bluffcatcher, so a call makes sense.

    I strongly dislike raising the river. I think we’re mostly behind, but even if I’m wrong, I still think villain’s range is pretty polarized, and that the value part of his range is almost exclusively stronger than our hand. Yes, we’ll sometimes get called by QQ or JJ (which I don’t think he’s betting 100% of the time) but I think we get called way move often by good Kx or 9x. IMO a raise OTR is in fact mostly a bluff, and there’s no need to turn our hand into a bluff. If we do like our hand well enough to raise, then we should have probably raised the turn, not the river.

  4. ugh…i always have a hard time constructing villain’s range at different stakes (mostly at micros where i play), esp. preflop. So i’m pretty much clueless about this guy’s preflop range.

    Given how the hand’s played out my first instinct tells me it’s a fold.

    I think Villain’s going to bet his entire range on the flop. (im not sure how to read his bet size tho. i’d say he’d probably go bigger if he’s trying fold out better hands?)

    But I think we can discount his air on the turn bc it’s a great card for him to represent.(again, i’m not sure if ppl at live mid stakes are capable of doing this.) So that leaves his marginal one-pair type of hands and value hands (trips+ or maybe a better king).

    I think the sudden big river bet discounts his marginal hands that has plenty of show down value. After all, why wound he want to bet hands like 88 or A7 on the river where he can cheaply show the hand down or check to hero to induce bluffs. Plus since our hand is under represented, Villain should have more incentive to try to show his hand down and hope to win often.

    Therefore i think his range on the river is weighed towards hands that beat us. The big concern is that it’s exploitable to fold a hand close to top of our range here. However, given Andrew’s description about opponents in general (predictable), I don’t think Villain is trying very hard to exploit hero in spot like this.

    Also i like the turn checking back. our value target should be (pocket) pairs worse than kings. I guess we can only get one street of value from those hands, and it’s better to wait until the river when Villain doesn’t have to worry about facing future big bets with marginal hands that couldn’t take too much heat.

  5. Wish I could amend my responses so I didn’t have to respond multiple times. Anyway…

    Villain virtually never checks turn with a 9 in his hand. He may get to the turn and check with AK or KQ (I suppose KJs or KTs some too) for some sort of pot control. I think his range is more heavily weighted to PP with some K’s in his range.

    I don’t think that raising is a bluff though I do think it Villain’s eyes it looks bluffy. Raising TP when opponent perceives us to be bluffing seems like a good strategy to me.

    I don’t hate calling but I think we can squeeze a bit more out of this hand than just flatting.

    Also I prob bet turn a lot against a straight forward player

  6. When I first read this it seems like a clear call, although reading eldodo’s post does make me wonder what he would be value betting for 4/5 pot here that we beat. Still, I think our underrepped hand is too strong to fold as he very well might be betting Qs-Ts for value. Also he still has some air in his range, he could play a hand like AQ like this hoping to fold out a small pocket pair with the river bet.

  7. I advocate just calling here. Mainly because I don’t see what hands villain can call a raise with that we beat. Raising is just risking more for the same reward, unless we really think we can get a fold from KT+ which seems highly unlikely given we checked back the turn. Had we bet the turn, I would consider raising an option. As played, I don’t think raising villain’s river bet is in our arsenal of moves in this spot.

    I think its very possible that we are beat. Sometimes I see players at this level slowplay their 9x or fh on the flop and and again on the turn, when no one gives them the opportunity to check-raise, they try to make up for missing streets with a larger river bet (especially because “it looks bluffy”). Villain might even be taking this route with a big king.

    However, we do have an underrepped hand in a spot where it certainly doesn’t appear like we have anything. That is why I am curious about the bet sizing: since it looks like we have nothing (busted fd/T8/random air) why is he trying to get us to fold? I’m torn as to whether this is a bluff with AK or a pocket pair <KK or big bet to make up for missed turn value with fairly big to monstrous hand ranging from KQ/AK to FH's.

    executive summary: call and be ok with whatever the result

  8. His preflop and flop action don’t narrow his range much. His turn check doesn’t say much either. If he views you as you as too aggressive he could be checking with the intent of raising his monsters (9x, 77, even AA or KK) and strong draws (nut flush draws, Tc8c, hands ), checking with the intent of calling medium strength hands (something like A7 or 88), and check folding his air.

    His large river bet is what polarizes his range. If he was value betting a pair worse than kings (TT-JJ) he would make it less. I would remove raising as an option. Normally I would rule out Kx, but since he saw you call with ace high before he might reason you would lighter than top pair. His value range I would assign better kings, AA, 9x, 77 and 44. I also wouldn’t expect him to be bluffing very often since he know’s you can call pretty lite. Given your read on how they play tighter in large pots I think it’s a fold.

  9. His value range is all over the place as I don’t think he checks back a 9 on the turn with the club draw out there. The King is a scarecard that most people tend to barrel as your perceived range is pocket pairs (that didn’t believe his cbet) or potentially a flush draw as he gave 4-1 on the flop for a call. (I don’t know too much about live games bet sizings though, maybe this is standard 1/3 pot on flop)

    I feel that he would double barrel a flush draw if he had that as the kings a scary card for your perceived range and you can still call with lower flush draws.

    Overall I suspect he has a monster (77 or KK, 44) or air (AQ/AJ/22, 33) that hes turned into a random bluff to get you to fold a pocket pair. I think he perceives you as weak and is hoping to take a bluffy line in the hope you spazz out and raise or hit a second nuts type hand.

    Overall I feel like you having the King doesn’t matter as its the same hand as 22 here as he is only representing trips+ or nothing. I wouldn’t be suprised to see KK or 77 and he checked back the turn hoping you made a flush. I dont think you see high pocket pairs or a 9 very often from the villain. I think with the sizing, he needs to be bluffing a lot of the time for you to make the call. Id probably let it go. I tend not to raise in these spots where your perceived range is small pocket pairs, ace highs and missed draws. He knows you wouldn’t check a 9 here twice so I dont know what your raise would represent

  10. I totally agree with Eldodo42, so I’ll just say “what he said”. Except, based on the play I’d say villain could have medium pocket pairs (40%), possibly 10, 10 or JJ or AJ, A,10 (40%) or x, 9 (20%). I think a call is in order.

  11. Easy snap call. Folding is not a good option since we under-repped our hand so much on turn. Villain could easily be going for max value with ~QQ. Raising is not a good idea since we can’t expect to get paid off by worse, but will usually get called by better. Calling seems automatic here, and I’d expect to see a better King a certain percentage of the time.

  12. Seems like a call. A villain who is “a little too loose in small pots, a little too tight in big pots, and way too predictable in general” seems highly unlikely to slow play flopped trips with the small flop bet and check on the turn with the flush draw on the board. He might slow play a flopped boat/quads, but that’s only a 6 combos (assuming he raises 97s). So his range on the flop seems to be mostly draws and overcards making a c-bet, with a very rare monster trying to entice a caller with a small bet.

    I would expect villain to bet most Kx hands that catch on the turn, but could see a check for pot control (or slow playing a monster). The river bet from villain (combined with the turn check) seems pretty polarized – i.e., either a good hand that is making up for missed value on the turn (possibly a good king or boat that was going for a c/r against “an aggro internet guy”) or a bluff with a busted draw that is trying to look scary. I also note that the relatively small sizing on the flop and turn check are consistent with an attempt by villain to draw cheaply.

    I think a bluff is more likely (with villain being unlikely to appropriately balanced), hero is getting OK odds and hero’s hand is underrepped, so I would call.

    I don’t think a raise bluffs much out or gets any value. While villain might bet worse Kx or 7x hands (or hands like KT that might fold to a raise) on the river, I don’t think he would use this sizing. On the other hand, I doubt a raise is getting called by worse. While villain might be inclined to make a hero call because of hero’s aggressive image and the missed diamond draw, I don’t think villain has many bluff catchers in his range for the reasons set forth above.

  13. I actually like a r/f line here. To the villain, the K turn is a blank. I’d imagine there simply aren’t too many Kings that hit you on the turn, other than a KcXc draw, which there aren’t many. He is likely extracting max value from 88+, as you’ve shown you’re happy to call down. Throw in a raise to $~375 and fold to a ship.

    • Think the issue with that line is that more often than not it would play out raise/call, not raise/ship. And when you get called after raising, you are almost always going to be beat, so you’ve inflated the pot with a raise that folds out almost no hands that beat you. Think that is the worst option imho.

  14. What hand bets small on the flop, turns down a bluffing opportunity, and bets huge on the river? Can you say polarized?

    In short, I don’t see how this could ever be a raise.

    On whether it is a call or a fold, I am a bit more ambivalent. But I would fold. I think villain probably checks down AQ/AJ with a good deal of frequency and probably has a lot of value hands on this board given his preflop sizing. ie: his sizing definitely doesn’t rule out 9x type hands or 77 or 44 or KJ/KQ. So yeah, I’d pitch it (maybe show the 8 if it wasn’t against nitcast rules).

  15. I don’t really know what to make of the small flop bet and then turn check. I don’t think it’s an overpair as he’d want to charge the draws more. I think it could either be a draw himself, a monster hand (any 9), or two overcards (like AK or KQ) as a blocking bet. I think the check on the turn mostly excludes the 9’s and skews his range towards the other two hands. The $120 on the river looks like a value bet to me, but could be a bluff as well. So calling as a bluff catcher depends on how often he would bluff here. My guess is not enough so we should either fold or re-raise as a bluff. If our read is right that he is very unlikely to have a monster than you could get him off his hand with a raise to about $325. This is provided he’s going to give you credit for taking this line – he might look you up thanks to your aggressive image.

  16. Fun prediction: you called and got shown AcAx.

    Fold because of what Gareth said.

    To everyone who is saying something other than fold, this is one of those spots where the situation leading up to the river was fun/interesting and it’s easy to get attached to the dynamic value of our hand that, given the river card and bet, is no longer relevant. It is more difficult to shake this emotional attachment than you consciously realize, so if you are in a spot like this and the decision seems close, err on the side of folding these (to correct for the bias).

  17. I’m mostly with Gareth but I think Villain is bluffing often enough to warrant a call.

    This can too-easily be a ‘standard’ c-bet, checking the turn with air, and then betting the river because ‘that’s the only way I can win’ and ‘Hero doesn’t have anything’.

  18. Like a lot of people, first instinct is just call, given his betsize. But if I’m in villain’s shoes, I’m probably betting this big with light value hands to make them look bluffy, against a perceived pocket pair/7x.

    Since we block a lot of draw combos, and he didn’t bet turn, I would take a lot of those hands out of his range. Also – what 1/3 pot CBs flop OOP and then checks turn? I would expect TT-QQ to bet bigger flop, and Kx to bet turn since its such a good bluff card.

    Only value hand that really makes sense given his action is, I think, 44. I’m a huge nit so I’m probably always flatting, but given your image, the more I think about it, the more a raise makes sense. Sick play if you did it, sir.

  19. Fun spot … At first I figured easy call, under-repped hand, lets see a showdown. But then I look at the Turn non-action. I agree that any trip 9x should bet this Turn … should. But there are a lot of opponents out there who would look to c/r here with any 9x or flat with AK against an aggressive opponent so they can lead the River and ‘piss’ off the aggressive opponent into a call.

    What would this opponent raise PF with? AK/9x/44? QQ/JJ?

    Hero’s lack of aggression can let V think he was on missed flush or air, but why didnt Hero bet Turn to build a bigger pot for flush? I have seen plenty of opponents overbet the River when they were ‘disappointed’ that their plan for the Turn didn’t work out and they were ‘making up’ for those lost chips by betting larger on the River. I also think that some V would bet this way so they dont get raised like they might with a ‘standard’ value bet.

    We dont like our kicker ‘of course’, but this could be a spot to raise IP and push an opponent off a bigger K or even a small 9x (but if small 9x, why the PF raise?). It certianly would look bluffy, but a ‘tit for tat overbet’ raise to $500 or so should do the trick here. It’s a pot sized raise for a good portion of V stack and will make him think. Hero certainly has a 9 in his range. My only issue with this play is that if V views Hero as aggressive, then why wasn’t Hero protecting his 9 on Flop/Turn?

    Fun spot … call>raise>fold IMO … GL

  20. I’d like to hear what Nate’s thoughts were on the hand while he was watching it live (as a guest comment on the answer blog post)

  21. I think we can rule out a raise. We can’t expect to get called by worse very often. Even if villain would look us up occasionally with TT-QQ, he’ll have at least as many slow-played monsters or better kings. So I can’t see us winning 50% of the time that we’re called. Nor can we expect to fold out better very often. As Gareth points out, his range is polarized. But even if he merged his range and made this river bet with as weak as TPMK, it’s not clear that he’d fold his better kings to a raise given that we’ve underrepresented our hand and the draw missed.

    The other two options are close. If my math is correct, we need to be good here at least 30.7% of the time in order to call. If we had the ace of clubs, then it would be a clear fold since we’d block a lot of his missed draws. But if we think that he can get here sometimes with AcXc, TcJc, 5c6c, 86s, and T8s — and if we discount some of his kings and nines because he checked the turn — then we’re close to 30%. Add in as little as a 5% spazz factor, and I think it’s a call.

    All that being said, I think that this is close enough that I would go with my live read. If he looked legitimately confident, then I would fold.

    Interesting spot.

  22. This is a spot where I have been getting myself into trouble a lot lately. I tend to call rivers where I have underrepped my hand because I think they must be taking a stab at the pot because I played so weakly. I consider this a leak if…

    a. Villain is a fish who isn’t paying much attention or adjusting to how I am playing. He is just playing his hand.
    b. Other factors tell me he is strong. (I think it is a leak to give too much weight to one piece of information. The fact that I am underrepped is only one factor.)

    In this case, the fact that Villain bombed the river both absolutely (almost a quarter of his remaining stack) and relatively (80% of the pot) makes me think he is strong with something like a TPTK or better. Maybe he flopped a boat with 77. Maybe he turned TPTK with AK, Maybe he rivered a boat with 44.

    The turn check could be weakness, but I think it’s could be an attempted check raise.

    On the river, we have a lot of information. I dont think we beat much. He is less likely to have missed clubs because we have that. He is unlikely to have a naked pocket pair because I dont think he would bomb the river with marginal showdown value. So he basically has the nuts or nothing.

    With all that said, I think it applies to a fish, not a LAG reg. Because the guy is a reg, I probably call because…

    a. It’s hard to have the nuts on this board (even though I may play some nutted hands this way)
    b. regs like to attack passivity. (I would play a lot more hands that cant beat a K this way)

    I would like to re-emphasize that if I thought the guy was a fish, I would snap fold. Here, I would sigh call.

    • “He is less likely to have missed clubs because we have that” – Since he is much more likely to bet the turn with a draw when he checks his air range is weighted heavily towards complete air. Given we have blockers to flush and straights draws makes it even less likely he has a missed draw, but the turn check is the most relevant factor.

      “I dont think we beat much” – Given the sizing I’d say maybe less than 5% of the time he has TT-QQ or a worse king he’ll play it like this, so I’d go further and say we are beating virtually none of his value range.

      So the question would be is this the type of person to bomb the river with complete air 1/3 of the time or more? Given that he saw Andrew bet/call his stack off with ace high earlier I would guess not. I think it’s a sigh fold against a live reg, turbo muck against a fish.

      “It’s hard to have the nuts on this board” – This type of reasoning used to be a huge leak in my game. The last time I thought like this was “he would have to have exactly 7h4h to have the nuts here, he probably doesn’t have it”. He had exactly 7h4h. While there was zero chance of me getting away from that hand the lesson I learned was “if it walks like the nuts, quacks like the nuts, more often than not it’s the nuts”. If you think villain would consider 9x to be a nutish type hands against Andrew then it’s really not that hard to have the nuts here.

      “almost a quarter of his remaining stack” – This is tournament logic being applied to a cash game. If this bet was on the turn it could mean he was trying to set up a river shove, but on the river it doesn’t mean anything (unless you would try to bluff raise him off 9x, which I think is ill-advised).

  23. Lots of good observations. Like Carlos states, this river bet is large relative to villains stack as well as to the pot. As many noted, this seems out of line with the flop and turn action.
    I think the straddle is noteworthy. I’d like to know if this was the first straddle or if it had been regularly occuring in this game. While the straddle helps disquise Hero’s hand, in my VERY limited experience, there are certain regulars who love to raise a straddle, especially the first one. Perhaps villain was hoping to steal the blinds and straddle, but when he fails he makes a weak stab at the pot, checks the turn, and bets the river. But I would assume the other regulars would know this and call if villain was full of shit.
    I also think Hero’s image is important, as it may explain villain’s line. If villain expects hero to play like an aggressive internet kid, he might weakly bet the flop to induce a raise, check the turn hoping to check raise, and then finally bet large on the river to make up for missed bets. This makes the most sense to me, so I think our poster is correct, Hero’s hand is disguised, and villain thinks he is ahead. To me, this eliminates a raise, since villain will likely call and we have some showdown value. I’m not convinced we have to bluff, yet I’m not convinced we can raise for value.
    I estimate villain has a range of 88+, AKo, AQs+, KQs, which makes us a favorite, so I would call, but I do not mind a fold based on the low confidence I have in understanding villain’s line.

  24. i’m heavily inclined to believe his range is polarized so i’m almost never raising (surprised at the amount of consideration raising has gotten in this discussion): he’s hardly ever folding better (other than KT, KJ? KQ?? maybe) and he’s not calling worse (88, TT-QQ, A7 etc.).

    i give him hands like 88, TT-QQ a pretty-much-negligible amount of the time: i would expect a bigger flop lead out with these hands considering hero’s image. also, i can’t imagine villain is leading out so strongly on the river with such great bluff-catchers. if villain is unable to recognize the bluff-catching value of these hands he is also unlikely to have the imagination to bluff the river with a “good hand”. and the river bet is too large to be a value bet with such a marginal hand.

    small flop lead out makes me suspicious that villain is massive considering hero’s image – he certainly doesn’t expect hero to be going anywhere, more likely he expects hero to raise. if he was going to try push hero off with overcards that didn’t improve by the river (eg. AQ, AJ etc.) i expect a bigger flop bet and a second barrel on scary turn – though the lack thereof obviously isn’t enough to deduce that hero doesn’t have air in his range.

    KQ, KJ, KT, 9x are certainly in villain’s range. i expect KQ, KJ, KT to lead out stronger on the flop assuming villain is a player capable of recognizing that these are hands he needs to bet to win with. in any case how many KJ, KT combos is he opening from MP? same goes for 9x: A9s probably, A9o maybe; and K9 and less very unlikely (especially considering we can account for 2 kings). also, psychologically, a value bet with KT, KJ, KQ might be less likely to be so large? so while i think these hands make up a considerable portion of his range, i think he is most likely to be holding AA, AK and less-likely monsters like 77, 99, KK, 44.

    statistically, he needs to be bluffing more than 120/390 of the time for it to be a profitable call (assuming his range is polarized). he definitely has a fair share of air in his range. hero should reflect on how active/passive villain has been to gauge how likely he is to fire air like so.

    i think i fold and ask him to show AA try get some information. next time he does it i call.

  25. Like many others my snap reaction was to call.

    I really not a fan of raise/folding. I think we don’t get called and win very often and even if villain 3 bet bluffs a very small number of times we lose tremendous equity. I think with a raise our line looks a bit bluffy which will get us called sometimes but could also induce villain to play above his head and raise.

    After thinking for a minute I really think this might be a spot to lay this down. The villains river bet sizing coupled with his check on the turn really concerns me. This is something I’ve noticed players do when they have a monster and they perceive their opponent to be overly aggressive. They check the turn hoping the agro opponent will spew, or stab at the pot so they can check raise, then when it gets checked behind they tend to want to make up for what they perceive as lost value by not betting the turn by over sizing their river bet. Yep, pot is small, we got off cheap, I SMELL a rat.

  26. I raise to $240 total, folding to a 3b.

    I am thinking that you beat all bluffs, who will fold to your raise.

    You are Losing to most Kings that are raising pre flop, but most Kings are not checking the Turn.

    You are losing to all 9’s but rare for a 9 to even raise Pre, let alone check Turn, so almost zero 9’s in his hand.

    You are seen as overly Aggro, and perhaps he looks you up lighter than usual?

    You could have 9’s in your hand so you will not be 3bet without a very strong hand, most of whom do not play it this way (capping their own hand range)

    so, little downside, slightly bigger upside, I RAISE !!

    PS did not read comments above before posting this.

  27. Can’t stop thinking about this one.

    Its villain’s river bet sizing that I am stuck on.

    While I can see where the posts advocating raising are coming from, I have an inkling that with a hand like QQ, JJ, 10, 88 etc. (basically the hands that villain might be betting but that we beat) his bet sizing would be just a bit smaller. I think in these situations he realizes that his hand isn’t strong but doesn’t want to lose value if it is likely to be the best hand. His bet size would be a bit defensive. I think in the neighborhood of $100. (I realize we are splitting hairs a bit here) Basically with the intentions of getting value if his hand is best, while making his bet strong-ish enough to try and discourage us from raising air.

    The fact that he chooses to bet a bit more than ¾ pot, just seems like he is betting as much as he can without trying to seem overly strong. I think it’s important to remember that this bet also represents almost ¼ of villain’s active stack at this point.
    The line villain has taken just seems strong especially when I think that he perceives hero as overly agro and a bit spew-y:
    Preflop to $30——probably pretty standard 3xing the straddle
    Flop $30—–not sure what the typical C bets looked like in this game but this seems a bit weak and almost like he is hoping to get Hero to make a move at it.
    Turn check—-He checks what would be a decent card for him to continue on. Again seems like he is inviting Hero to act in accordance with the way he perceives him.
    River $120—Villain fires a little less than ¼ of his stack. Just seems so much like he has a strong hand (AA @ the bottom of his range) and has been hoping Hero would get aggressive, now that plan has back fired and he makes a “make-up” bet. Basically trying to get as much value as he can on the river to make up for his perceived loss of value on the previous streets.

Comments are closed.