PokerQueens.co.uk

[Anton]

http://pokerqueens.co.uk/problem.html

Really bad luck for this guy in my opinion.

[Dave]

Ouch! Am going to have to think about this one...

[hurleyp]

he misses the basic point that he has third pair after the flop: does he expect to win with this after the flop or turn? if so he should go all in then.

this shows how allowing cheap cards can damage you even if it doesn;t hit your opponent's hand.

as important is the fact that just because the guy is an idiot or calling everything does not mean he is holding nothing. move on and don;t get trapped with small hands that seem good unless you go for the kill early. i would not go all-in.

[Anton]

I agree. If he was going to go all in he should have done so after the flop. Now there's nothing he can do but lay down.

He's also imo completely wrong in his summing up of what his opponent may or may not have. He describes him as a bad player (in not so measured words) and then says that he can predict with certainty that he does not have higher than bottom pair. What rubbish! My experience of bad/inexperienced players is that it is harder to predict their holdings than it is of a better player.

He was making pot sized bets though, which is why I described him as unlucky. I wouldn't describe that as giving cheap cards necessarily. It's not as if he was checking down bottom pair. I think his play was pretty reasonable under the circumstances and that jack really crippled him. He's very likely beaten now.

A

[m4rkie]

I thought that to have such an opinion of another player probably means he's a bad player too.

[Bennie the Flop]

Check and lose (probably). You deserve it! If you are going to try and 'punish' a 'bad' player then you need better than a pair of 7s on the flop IMHO. If the bloke never folds, you never really know whether he has a hand or not!