SQZ Pot vs Aggro Fishy Reg
Posted by PokerVagabond
Posted by PokerVagabond posted in Low Stakes
SQZ Pot vs Aggro Fishy Reg
We're both roughly 100bb deep. (still can't figure out how to import PP hands properly)
dealt to Hero [ Tc, Kc ]
Player3 calls (0.10)
Player4 folds
Player5 folds
Hero raises 0.40 to 0.40 on the btn
Player1 raises 1.15 to 1.20 in the sb
Player2 folds
Player3 folds
Hero calls (0.80)
* Dealing Flop * : [ Ac, 3s, 4s ]
Player1 bets (0.65)
Hero calls (0.65)
* Dealing Turn * : [ 3c ]
Player1 bets (1.19)
Hero raises 8.86 to 8.86
No stats as playing on party and had the villain labeled as super aggro, at least at the time. I think against any other opponent then this would be a mandatatory fold preflop but this guy had been aggresive for a while and I felt it was just 'too good' to fold at the time. OOP it would be an easy muck, but in position against an aggresive laggy fish I think I could justify a call.
When villain bets 1/4 pot on a 2 flush board, my instinct is that it's normally incredibly weak. This guy could have 78s,JTs etc etc. Having the backdoor nut flush and the backdoor straight draw, I felt it was just enough to continue, looking to make moves on certain turns and put underpairs to the test.
When the 3c comes on the turn I was in too minds on what to do after his 1/4 bet yet again. I simply dont think many decent Ax hands would bet this small again, maybe just AA and AK that I block. Initially I thought raising was mandatory but maybe not after I have thought about it more and with us getting just about the correct odds. Anyway I raised but the sizing gave me problems away from the table. Smaller or just jamming? seeing as I would probably would be commited if I came in for a raise, depending on what I made it.
Eitherway I just decided to ship it to get folds from all his underpairs, and maybe even some of his weaker A highs.
Would love to hear peoples thoughts
Loading 4 Comments...
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.
This thread has been locked. No further comments can be added.