Im playing $2/$4 NL at Stars
MP open raises to $16. Im next with [Kd] and reraise to $44. The guy to my left who is horrible calls as does the original raiser.
The pot is $138. The flop comes [6h][4s] Checked to me and I bet $100. Mr horrible folds, but then the original raiser check raises all in. Its $250 to me with a pot of $590.

What do you do?

Any read on MP?

If he's solid, I can only see him raising and calling your reraise with AA-JJ & AK, and check raising the flop with AA, JJ, or maybe [Kh].

I would fold.

Since he reaised preflop and then called a fairly good sized reraise, i was pretty sure he had a high pair. More importantly, he had to know I had AA or KK (at worst QQ), so when he still check raised all in I was pretty sure he had AA or JJ. No way I was going to call and pray he had QQ which is pretty much the only hand I can beat.

Unfortunatley, he showed [Th] for the flush draw. That was the last thing I put him on since he raised first.

Wow.


Hold on, I need to read that again. WOW.


I guess he just got added to your hit list of fish?

I'm not sure I'd call him a 'fish' - more loose and very aggressive - maniac I'd say

Fish doesn't just mean a 'bad player' - it means a loose/passive one

Is this from Super System? This move seems typical of something that Brunson wrote about...being willing to put someone in on just a draw if they are tighter to try and take the pot down. If he gets called, he still has a chance to win...

Is this guy a fish in PT for you iceman? I'm assuming his postflop play(which isn't that bad IMO) doesn't outweight his preflop play of raising in MP w/ .

Don't get me wrong, this is not a move I am making.

Ive never played him before. Do I think he's a fish? Hell no. I think hes very tricky and a dangerous player. I think his play was a very good one. There is just no way I can put him on that hand because he raised preflop first.

If he had limped and then called my raise..and then made that move I wouldve called most likely because the pot wouldve been smaller and nobody would make a huge overbet all in with a set. He knew I thought he had a high pair which is why the play worked. However, against most players he would be drawing to his flush because most people won lay that down.

I think his play was pretty good as well against you. But, then you said against most people he would be drawing to his flush...which is not ideal IMO.

You said he is a tricky and dangerous player because of the play he made...but because most people w/ an overpair would be making that call, doesn't that make the play -EV in the long run except against the best opponents...and since you have never played him before(and assuming he didn't have a stellar read on you right off the bat), can you just assume he is a tricky player or more willing to put his money in w/ a draw which would not be in his best interests IMO? Does the checkraise all in w/ the flush draw make the move one that gets him in the tricky player category?

Anyway, try and figure out what I am asking...I'm running myself in circles it feels like.

Wait, I sat down and figured it out...is he making good moves or is he just someone who sees a draw and goes, "Yippee! I got a shot!" I guess you deciphered he is a tricky player from more moves and studying him while you played with him a while, but I just want to make sure I guess...

Raising with QTs is a very tricky play in the first place. At higher stakes you cant juts wait for AK and high PPs to raise or you'll never get paid off.

Ive made that same play lots of times after raising with something like 98s.

The next time he makes that same play hes liable to have a set, or else he wouldnt have shown his cards.

But the horrible guy folded already when the guy check raised all in...so I dont get your point. He didnyt make his decision to do the check raise all in until AFTER he saw the coast was clear from the horrible guy. Actually he might have done it anyway because he would be getting even better odds it the horrible guy put another $100 in (although his variance would clearly be higher here since one of would probably call)